Destroying the trees

[Penguin68]

According to sources the whole tree is poisonous

From http://aspcapro.org/sites/pro/files/zk_vetm0905_646_650.pdf

While various potentially toxic chemicals are present in Taxus species, all parts of the plants except the aril (i.e. the fleshy covering of the seeds) contain cardiotoxic taxine alkaloids, the main compounds of toxicologic concern. The two important cardiotoxic alkaloids present are taxine A and taxine B.

1,2 The cinnamate metabolites of both taxines are also cardiotoxic. Paclitaxel, which is of pharmacologic interest because of its antimitotic and anticancer effects, is also present in Taxus species and is potentially arrhythmogenic in some people; however, it is not the major toxic principle in this plant.

Taxines remain in the plant throughout the year, with the maximal plant taxine concentrations appearing during the winter.2

Dried yew plant material retains its toxicity for several months and remains a hazard to domestic animals. The amount of plant material required to obtain a lethal dose is quite small: The LDmin in dogs is about 2.3 g of leaves/kg, or about 11.5 mg/kg of taxine alkaloids.2 So a dog could consume a potentially lethal dose while playing with Taxus species branches or sticks. Since cases have been recorded in which horses have collapsed within 15 minutes of consuming Taxus species, absorption of ingested taxine alkaloids in monogastric animals is rapid.1

And from Wikipedia:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxus_baccata

Toxicity[edit]

Most parts of the tree are toxic, except the bright red aril surrounding the seed. This appears like a berry with the end split open to reveal the seed - and is safe to consume.[citation needed]

The foliage itself remains toxic even when wilted, and toxicity increases in potency when dried.[16] Ingestion and subsequent excretion by birds whose beaks and digestive systems do not break down the seed's coating are the primary means of yew dispersal.[17] The major toxin within the yew is the alkaloid taxine.[18] Horses have a relatively low tolerance to taxine, with a lethal dose of 200?400 mg/kg body weight; cattle, pigs, and other livestock are only slightly less vulnerable.[19] Several studies[20] have found taxine LD50 values under 20 mg/kg in mice and rats.

Symptoms of yew poisoning include an accelerated heart rate, muscle tremors, convulsions, collapse, difficulty breathing, circulation impairment and eventually heart failure. However, there may be no symptoms, and if poisoning remains undetected death may occur within hours.[21] Fatal poisoning in humans is very rare, usually occurring after consuming yew foliage. The leaves are more toxic than the seed.[18]

[Swan545644]

Best option to my mind is to incorporate trees into new garden. Why wasn't anyone consulted, seems Southwark and architects run roughshod over residents and community as a whole.

[first mate]

Perhaps a topiary garden....? With some Niwaki too?

[dhjs]

I'm always sorry that when making decisions regarding educational developments, either current or future related, that inevitably not everyone will be satisfied, or agree with the outcomes.

We experience this with decisions about homework, curriculum matters, ways of reporting attainment and progress to parents, and I've become reconciled to understanding that with every happy parent, there will be one experiencing an opposite emotion.

Yew trees are highly poisonous - as one who visited the Poison Garden at Alnwick a couple of years ago, I know that you wouldn't want to risk children going anywhere near yew trees - leaves even when dying or dead can still exert a terrible effect.

www.alnwickgarden.com/explore/whats-here/the-poison-garden/about

We also are trying to maximise the limited outdoor space that will be available to our youngest pupils at the future Belham. We want them to learn how to grow plants and enjoy being outside, engaged in purposeful activity, and although this space is not large, it allows us to plan further activities for the future pupils of the community. We want the children to learn about growing plants from seed to fruit, and we can create a space where this might happen. But we are very open to working with members of the community and would love to hear your ideas and receive your support for promoting a garden "corridor" along Bellenden Road.

As well as the plans online, I'm more than happy to share the vision with the community - just get in touch via Dulwich Hamlet Junior School or visit The Belham Primary School website.

Sonia Case Executive Head Teacher DHJS and BPS

[first mate]

Thank you for your explanation, at least the reason is now clear. One does wonder though why the poison issue was not flagged up right away? Anyway, at least we now have clarity. I am also guessing that Southwark will not want to plant these trees anywhere that is frequented by children, including public parks?

Still think it a great shame, a waste of public money planting trees that are considered to be such a hazard to children within a space that has been used as a nursery, not to mention the time and care devoted by a member of the community to their upkeep.

I am sorry Lucy that you were not given this simplest of explanations from the outset.

[Jennys]

Assume you have double checked they really are yew trees and not box or some other non toxic species. Especially since you discussed the original planting with Southwark.

[dhjs]

But surely many years of viewing pleasure is not a waste of public money? The trees have been "seen" on a daily basis by many people and therefore have provided a positive experience. The time and care devoted to the upkeep resulted in these trees thriving.

The nursery children from the Southwark Women Muslim's Association had a playspace at the back of the building - I have little knowledge, but imagine there were no more than 10 or so -and for a limited time period -certainly not the pupil roll that the school will accommodate.

I've been informed they are yew trees. Know no more.

Sonia Case

[Swan545644]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thank you for your explanation, at least the

> reason is now clear. One does wonder though why

> the poison issue was not flagged up right away?

> Anyway, at least we now have clarity. I am also

> guessing that Southwark will not want to plant

> these trees anywhere that is frequented by

> children, including public parks?

>

> Still think it a great shame, a waste of public

> money planting trees that are considered to be

> such a hazard to children within a space that has

> been used as a nursery, not to mention the time

> and care devoted by a member of the community to

> their upkeep.

>

> I am sorry Lucy that you were not given this

> simplest of explanations from the outset.

[Swan545644]

This explanation does not explain the destruction, and to my mind some more consultation would have been polite. There have been children in this school for the last fifteen years and none of them have been poisoned by the trees. I expect all your gardens contain hazardous plants of one kind or another yet one is happy to let children playin them. Yew trees are found in all our English church yards and many people make hedges of them, in fact up and down Camberwell grove they are abundant and as far as I know no children have died from the affects.

[first mate]

dhjs,

I actually do think it is a waste to take out healthy trees, in prime condition, and then replace them with more shrubs. I also do wonder why the word poisonous was not mentioned right at the outset?

[dhjs]

Yew trees are poisonous and as a head of the school, I would not be fulfilling the most basic of health and safety requirements if the children were encouraged to interact in this space.

There have been many opportunities to view the drawings, prior to the plans being published on the Southwark website. We have communicated these consultations in a many ways including the EDF

The building has not been used as a school for many years - a small private nursery existed at the back of the building.

The trees can be replanted and continue to provide viewing pleasure.

The space can then be used by young children interacting with a variety of plants they might grow themselves.

We remain committed to working with Southwark, with the community and with the future parents to bring a fantastic former school - a wonderful example of great Victorian architecture - back to life for the many additional children that need school places in the area.

Children need new schools and if we can, in addition, provide a stimulating environment in which they can learn, so much the better.

[Alex K]

Intemperate text deleted.

I think that to claim "health and safety" as a reason for cutting down trees is conceivable; but not the representation of tree-leveling as the least that a conscientious care-giver might do.

A conscientious care-giver might, as with conkers ("They're not proper chestnuts; don't eat them, they'll make you ill"), warn those in her charge: Don't eat the yew trees' needles, berries, seeds, bark; don't chew their twigs. That would be the least that she could do. That would be enough.

The tenor of the head-of-school's response, above, is... trunchbullesque. I HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED AND I SHALL HAVE MY WAY. Health-and-safety as a rag to cover naked aggression: Well, to put that on show will teach children a lesson of its own sort, and one that they might as well learn young.

I certainly hope that they do NOT learn to deploy the verb "interact" as she has done.

[first mate]

dhjs,

Yes, it is clear that you are fulfilling your brief in adhering to health and safety, that is not the issue. The point, I feel, is more one of poor communication. It would have been so simple to say something like the following from the outset, "regrettably, since these trees are highly toxic, we are obliged, for health and safety reasons to remove them".

If you refer back to the late communications with Lucy Snow, the lady who has tended the trees over many years, it seems that the Capital projects Southwark person was not clear about reasons for removal either.

I am not suggesting this failure of communication was your personal responsibility. I looked at the planning application and could not see mention of poisonous trees anywhere- perhaps it is buried in the detail?

Let us hope that a home can be found for the trees and that there is a positive end to this saga.

I am sure the school will be very successful and look forward to seeing the final result.

[dhjs]

Alex K Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Intemperate text deleted.

>

> I think that to claim "health and safety" as a

> reason for cutting down trees is conceivable; but

> not the representation of tree-leveling as the

> least that a conscientious care-giver might do.

>

> A conscientious care-giver might, as with conkers

> ("They're not proper chestnuts; don't eat them,

> they'll make you ill"), warn those in her charge:

> Don't eat the yew trees' needles, berries, seeds,

> bark; don't chew their twigs. That would be the

> least that she could do. That would be enough.

>

> The tenor of the head-of-school's response, above,

> is... trunchbullesque. I HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED

> AND I SHALL HAVE MY WAY. Health-and-safety as a

> rag to cover naked aggression: Well, to put that

> on show will teach children a lesson of its own

> sort, and one that they might as well learn

> young.

>

> I certainly hope that they do NOT learn to deploy

> the verb "interact" as she has done.

On Alex K I wish you hadn't deleted the previous message; so much preferred you stating it as it is and really enjoyed being described as Ms Trunchbull rather than trunchbullesque - a rather poor use of a proper noun with an overused suffix. I've been described in many ways, mostly very positive I'm pleased to say, so it was refreshing to be likened to Trunchbull - it's given me so many ideas. I particularly liked your suggestion that I should stand outside barking instructions at the children, not to do this, not to do that - it fits my vision of education entirely. Let the children NOT run free, I say.

Also felt that I could set you some homework regarding botany and poison - plese produce 500 words on the toxicity of the horse chestnut compared to the yew please. On my desk tomorrow!!

I do apologise for the use of the word interact though; like you I abhor jargon and delight in discussing effective language choices with the pupils, and I intend today to go through all schemes of work deleting any references to language that hasn't passed the "AlexK" test. 'Interact' - I banish you to the Chokey!

[dhjs]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dhjs,

>

> Yes, it is clear that you are fulfilling your

> brief in adhering to health and safety, that is

> not the issue. The point, I feel, is more one of

> poor communication. It would have been so simple

> to say something like the following from the

> outset, "regrettably, since these trees are highly

> toxic, we are obliged, for health and safety

> reasons to remove them".

>

> If you refer back to the late communications with

> Lucy Snow, the lady who has tended the trees over

> many years, it seems that the Capital projects

> Southwark person was not clear about reasons for

> removal either.

>

> I am not suggesting this failure of communication

> was your personal responsibility. I looked at the

> planning application and could not see mention of

> poisonous trees anywhere- perhaps it is buried in

> the detail?

> Let us hope that a home can be found for the trees

> and that there is a positive end to this saga.

>

> I am sure the school will be very successful and

> look forward to seeing the final result.

Thank you First Mate for acknowledging that the communication failure was not my personal responsibility. The process that has followed to date has been collaborative between the architects, the council, the Dfe, the Trust and many members of the community, including those who formed the Core Applicant Group to put the original application together.

All the plans and reports now posted on the Southwark planning website are down to some incredible hard work by others, as I have continued to run Dulwich Hamlet whilst developing the Belham.

The need to maximise all available space for the children on the limited site we've got, is really crucial and much as I too admire these trees and hope they can continue to provide pleasure in another local space such as on Goose Green (or even Warwick Gardens?), the future children will really benefit a garden corridor at the front of the school.

May I suggest that the community starts to consider the use of the site that will be vacated once the current Bellenden School is rebuilt in another part of East Dulwich? It has huge potential to provide a green community park with spaces for dogwalking, sport and gardening - the current Bellenden school is due to move into its new premises in Summer 2016.

[rch]

Hi Sonia, thank you so much for coming here and explaining the situation, it's been very helpful. Your suggestions of alternative garden locations are very useful as well.

From Dee Lewis' email reproduced earlier in this thread, it looks like the felling of the yew trees is immanent... my guess is that it will happen within the dormant season before the end of March, probably just after the consultation period closes on the 4th March.

I'm still trying to get technical advice as to whether it is viable to attempt to move the trees, but in the meantime I would strongly recommend that interested local residents attend the Camberwell Community Council meeting tonight to engage with the relevant councillors in order to get some kind of alternative garden program launched.

[Penguin68]

Having raised (I think) the hare of the toxicity of yews (sorry, another string to the destroyer's bow) I would urge at least attempts to save them - they reflect many years of careful work, have contributed significantly to the urban landscape and are (toxicity apart) damn fine things. Even if transplant does set them back somewhat they will, with luck and a following wind, survive to flourish in another location. They cannot anyway just be 'cut down' if the area is to be replanted - the root balls would also have to be removed, so why not with the living trees?

It would be unfortunate if attempts to present an 'improved' garden environment for children should start with an act of mindless vandalism. As a legacy of an 'environmentalist' approach it would reek.

[Nigello]

As a last-ditch effort, why not ask for responsible individuals to plant them in their own gardens and promise to takecare of them. That way, the work won't have been wasted and the trees will continue to prosper and give pleasure.

[Swan545644]

I also want to raise the issue of the other artists involved in the renewal scheme. Somebody has raised the point with me that had it been Anthony Gormleys bollards or Tom Phillips's gate or the book by John Latham I am sure the new "garden" design would not have got as far as it has without consultation at the very least.

[Tosca]

Dear Lucy,

I've PM'd you

[dhjs]

Some further information to provide all members of the community including local parents who hope to send their children to the school either next year or in future years:

http://www.thebelhamprimaryschool.org.uk/uploads/3/8/5/1/38515623/topiary_statement.pdf

[ellabrunswick]

I walk and cycle along Bellenden Road and the topiary trees are a delight at all times of year. They compliment the architecture of the building and make excellent use of a narrow space. They make me smile - and many others too, I'm sure. I've only just learned from this thread who was responsible for the years of work it's taken to shape the trees - thank you Lucy for all your work on making them so beautiful.

The architecture of the building will be considered as part of the planning application - and the heritage report shows there's been careful thought about how to make a historical building work as a modern school. Similarly, I think the new school could really make a feature of what it has inherited in the topiary display - it's a huge investment of time, money and imagination by both the council and local people.

There is not enough detail on the planning application to judge how the proposed space would actually be used for gardening by the children, especially as they are proposing a planter containing an 'instant hedge' in the same narrow corridor.

From the 'Design and Access statement' of the planning application:

Growing area

The strip of land along Bellenden road will be connected with both the main and the Reception playground. A new planter with instant hedging set behind a new vertical bar metal fence will separate this space from the street, safeguarding pupils. It will enhance the street setting of the school and provide a learning resource through proving planting space for all the Years of the school.'

From looking at the drawings, I can't agree that this hedge will 'enhance the street setting of the school' more than the existing topiary. I think the school should retain the yews, and simply keep that strip closed off to pupils (to avoid any risk of accidental consumption of leaves).

Yes, it is a small site for a school. So small that playtimes will apparently have to be staggered. But there is a roof garden proposed which could offer much better conditions for growing food in containers than the strip between the high school building and a hedge. There are two great gardens - Marsden Road Wildlife Garden and Bellenden Road Nature Garden - within short walks of the school, the latter perhaps in need of a school partner now that Highshore has moved. There are lots of possibilities that would connect the school with the local community.

I am going to respond to the planning application with these points and suggest anyone else interested should do so with their comments too. You can write by email [email protected], stating the application number 15/AP/0174 and your postal address (if you don't want your address and email address to show on the scanned version of your comments published on the website, make sure you ask for these to be redacted before being published).

[intexasatthe moment]

ella - what a fantastic post . Yes ,yes to .....the existing topiary makes me smile ,not too much of a stretch to say brightens my day .HUGE thanks to Lucy .

"there is a roof garden proposed which could offer much better conditions for growing food in containers than the strip between the high school building and a hedge. There are two great gardens - Marsden Road Wildlife Garden and Bellenden Road Nature Garden - within short walks of the school, the latter perhaps in need of a school partner now that Highshore has moved. There are lots of possibilities that would connect the school with the local community. "

excellent points

[Swan545644]

This is Lucy again. Thanks for the suggestion of a roof garden.

Also reiterate that the site is absolutely no good for flowers or veg.

I did a great deal of research before I planted the yews and the box, they are both shade tolerate and need very little maintenance.

[ellabrunswick]

Thanks intexas and Lucy!

The roof garden is on the existing plans - it's proposed to cover it with astroturf and have some natural play equipment there. It's L-shaped - a rough guesstimate gives 3.5m x 6m for one leg and 12m x 5m for the other (with skylights taking up some of the available space).