Childminder loses walnut tree fight (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Tree to be protected despite health risk fears
12:40pm Tuesday 21st February 2012 in New Forest
Tania and Stephen Grimwood.
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.
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)
sass
says...
12:57pm Tue 21 Feb 12
BP
says...
12:57pm Tue 21 Feb 12
For anyone who does not know the place, the name says it all.
The H&S loony world we live in now I would probably have been confined to indoors, and worn bubble wrap when I went out.
I knew not to eat or touch the walnuts because they could hurt me.
Its not rocket science.
Verbal Kint
says...
12:59pm Tue 21 Feb 12
lukolela
says...
1:00pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Verbal Kint wrote:My thoughts exactly!
maybe by actually minding the children they can be kept away from the danger......
timjim
says...
1:07pm Tue 21 Feb 12
How much time and effort has been wasted on such a ridiculous scenario.
And should you have a trampoline so close to a greenhouse?
And OMG, is that real grass, shouldn't be wood chippings and a soft rubberised floor area.
And those plants could attract wasps and bees, and we all know what that means?
It's a deathtrap out there!!!!
Stillness
says...
1:11pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Shoong
says...
1:12pm Tue 21 Feb 12
MissA
says...
1:15pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Stillness
says...
1:15pm Tue 21 Feb 12
GregETNet
says...
1:20pm Tue 21 Feb 12
.btck.co.uk/MapCropp
ingService
The Salv
says...
1:38pm Tue 21 Feb 12
.
My little Johny syndrome.
.
You need to get on with your neighbours. Unfortunetely this lady has gone far to far and now will be living with the stress of this dispute everyday which will in the end make her miserable.
.
I hope it was all worth it.
.
She should have just kept her mouth shut and pruned the tree.
Goldenwight
says...
1:40pm Tue 21 Feb 12
sass wrote:You would think so, wouldn't you. But the story suggests that this may not be the case.
You have every right to prune anything overhanging your property, back to the fence line. The tree should not have been planted so close to the fence.
In any event, the problem is Walnuts, and not a Walnut tree.
Stillness
says...
1:45pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Big Mac
says...
1:59pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Stillness
says...
2:11pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Big Mac wrote:Why? It's good practice for later life.
Why not just reduce the number of children from the group by excluding those that have a nut allergy. I think it's a disgrace sending young children to a 'nut house' in the first place.
Smartiepants
says...
2:11pm Tue 21 Feb 12
freefinker
says...
2:56pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Goldenwight wrote:Indeed, the story is right.
sass wrote:You would think so, wouldn't you. But the story suggests that this may not be the case.
You have every right to prune anything overhanging your property, back to the fence line. The tree should not have been planted so close to the fence.
In any event, the problem is Walnuts, and not a Walnut tree.
TPO's trump the right to prune.
bazzeroz
says...
3:57pm Tue 21 Feb 12
eurogordi
says...
4:26pm Tue 21 Feb 12
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?
loosehead
says...
4:27pm Tue 21 Feb 12
I like the idea of a net under the branches.
surely they knew of this scenario before they set up the child minders business?
So at one time of the year she ( maybe not) or her husband couldn't pick the nuts from her side of the tree?
I honestly believe this is about lazy people who don't want to be bothered to pick up the nuts in the Autumn.
Any person looking after or teaching or coaching children have to make sure the areas fit for them to play on.
As a rugby coach I hate picking up dog muck but it's my duty to remove it before the children fall in it can I cut off the dogs legs so they can't get to the pitch? no I can't so these people should be responsible & sweep the area for nuts it's that simple
Linesman
says...
4:49pm Tue 21 Feb 12
dango
says...
5:01pm Tue 21 Feb 12
Urbane Forager
says...
10:19am Wed 22 Feb 12
http://urbaneforager
.btck.co.uk/MapCropp
ingService
We also know several children who have nut allergies, although I'm no expert, I think they need to ingest the insides of the nut to be affected.
There is a saying, "Walnuts and Pears - plant for your heirs", meaning that they take ages to mature.
Cutting trees down is rarely a good idea - too much of it is done just because people don't want leaves on their sterile lawns or desire more sun in their garden.
Controversial?
I don't think so.
We actually need to think about these things a bit more deeply.
http://theurbanefora
ger.blogspot.com/201
2/01/no-more-pear-pi
rates.html
Verbal Kint says...
12:49pm Tue 21 Feb 12