Report this comment
  • "I have a nut and fruit peel allergy ... yet only for nuts and fruit packaged in the UK.

    I can eat organically produced nuts and fruit, have no problems with chocolate containing nuts providing it has been produced overseas and, although I don't like walnuts, I would imagine the ones referred to wouldn't affect me either unless treated with chemicals.

    Which is my point! I was diagnosed with my allergy about 12 years ago but only discovered this discrepancy when I accidentally ate nuts overseas in 2002 and didn't get a reaction. So, despite some saying this was irresponsible, I continued eating nuts to prove that these were safe.

    Back in the UK, I tried eating the same nuts packaged in this country and ... yes, you've guessed it, an almost immediate reaction.

    So do those with nut allergies have an allergy to the nut or the various chemicals that are used in food production within the UK?"
  • This field is mandatory
  • This field is mandatory
  • Please note we will not accept reports with HTML tags or URLs in them.

  • Enter the above word in the box below

Tree to be protected despite health risk fears

Tania and Stephen Grimwood.

Tania and Stephen Grimwood.

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by

COUNCIL chiefs have upheld a controversial decision to protect a walnut tree – despite claims it presents a serious health risk to children with allergies.

Childminder Tania Grimwood argued that walnuts dropping into her garden from overhanging branches could pose a risk to any child in her care with a nut allergy.

Mrs Grimwood, 44, of Heather Close, Hordle, lodged an appeal against a tree preservation order obtained by next door neighbour Michael Moring.

But the district council has ratified the order, which means she must secure the authority’s permission before pruning the 40-year-old tree.

Speaking at a meeting of the council’s appeals panel Mrs Grimwood said she needed to reduce the number of walnuts that landed on her lawn.

“One of the youngsters in my care could have a nut allergy and we’ve already had to turn others away,” she said.

Her husband Stephen said they were often visited by friends and their children, some of whom had severe nut allergies.

He added: “The tree is very close to our boundary. We have a duty of care to minimise the risk.”

Liz Beckett, one of the council’s tree officers, said the tree preservation order was issued amid fears that Mr and Mrs Grimwood planned to remove 40 per cent of the branches – a figure disputed by the couple.

Related links

Mr Grimwood said: “It’s never been our intention to ruin or decimate the tree. We just want to control the situation.”

The couple were assured that the tree preservation order would not necessarily prevent them from obtaining permission to prune the branches.

But Mr Grimwood replied: “I suspect that we’d like more of the tree cut back than our neighbour would. We’d come up against resistance every time we submitted an application.”

In a letter to the council Mr Moring said most of the walnuts were removed by wildlife before they fell from the tree.

Panel members upheld the TPO, saying it would enable the council to exercise some control over how much pruning took place.

Councillors claimed the couple could fence off the tree or make sure they picked up all the walnuts that landed in their garden.

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree