Southwark Woods Day

[taper]

I've just moved in to the area. The Southwark Woods people might be guilty of hyperbole. But the idea that we should allow Southwark to clear this area for new graves without a fight is ludicrous. Have you walked around the wooded section of The graveyard? It is beautiful, well established woodland and we should fight all the way any plans to scythe it down.

[edhistory]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> I know that Wikipedia (via 'Save Honor Oak

> Recreation Park) is claiming 300k burials - and

> that just between 1856 and 1984) - but if we

> assume 140 burial years to date (and that only

> gives 20 years or so when burials stopped before

> re-starting, and I think that was actually a

> longer hiatus) then this is burying at a rate of

> over 2000 a year (in the first 30 years the

> run-rate was only 1000 a year, at a time of higher

> mortality, again according to Wiki) - or over 5

> burials a day, seven days a week. An initial rate

> of 1000 a year for the first 30 years of

> operation, when mortality rates were higher,

> suggests a huge increase in annual burials after

> 1886 when death rates were falling to reach the

> claimed 300k. And of course many more than 2000

> burials a year at some point. By 1927 the New

> Cemetery was operating - again suggesting that to

> get to 300k burials there must have been an awful

> lot of dying activity locally, particularly as the

> same source suggests that between 1939 and 1984

> 91k cremations had taken place in the New

> Cemetery.

>

> These figures do not stack-up (and neither will

> the claimed bodies to make up the numbers).

> Paupers graves, out of interest, by the mid 19th

> century were not 'mass graves' - they were

> unmarked and there might be a number of coffins in

> each grave (stacked)- but their positions were

> recorded. The number of quite large monuments

> don't suggest huge amounts of room for unmarked

> paupers graves.

Good piece of analysis without access to original data.

The Camberwell Borough Council interment returns I have show:

1905 3153

1906 3011

1907 3359

1908 2924

There's a big BUT.

Within the above figures are stillborns and children:

1905 1279 40%

1906 1013 33%

1907 1260 37%

1908 1016 34%

[Penguin68]

I should have added that one area of genuine 'mass' burial would appear to be the square (oblong) of the war graves and memorial space, where, apart from some later (post WWII) individual graves there do appear to have been a number of warriors interred together (apart from those also memorialised, but not buried, there). I assume that this space is cared for by the commonwealth war graves commission (it is their style of headstone) and that this area would not be bulldozed and re-used. The early 20th century figures do support a later run-rate of 3000 interments a year - granted that some of these would not be taking up much space. Still births/ late miscarriages tended to be treated more as disposal than burial in those years, unlike practice today, and these may have been mass buried.

[edborders]

After the ten acres of woods are cut down and 200 dead people a year are buried, in 10 to 15 years there will be no more space in the 10 acres for more dead bodies and the woods will have been lost. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years.

Whether there are 300,000 graves of mostly poor people or no graves at all, whether there are beautiful historic monuments under the bushes and the trees or whether there is building rubble, a beautiful wild wood has grown up on the 10 acres. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years and we will have lost a wood.

Please see the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b76wj7BO8yI

Lewis Schaffer

Nunhead, American, father of two English boys.

Correction: My financial interest in not having the woods destroyed: I own a two bedroom flat in Nunhead and my flat should appreciate in value should the area be known an area of wild green places.

Please state any interest you many have with the planned destruction of this lovely place.

[taper]

A lot of graveyards from this area were designed as arboretums (so Nunhead, Abney Park in N16). Do you know if that was part of the original intention in Camberwell Old Cemetery? The woods look well established to me, rather than accidental.

[henryb]

I found 3 20/25 year old Sessile Oaks up in the woodland area they are going to clear on One Tree Hill in Camberwell New Cemetery along the boundary with the Nature Reserve. Sessile Oaks or Cornish Oaks are the other UK native species of oak and support more wildlife than any other native tree species.

[Penguin68]

As the trees are (often) growing through monuments I guess these are not anything to do with a planned arboretum (not the fashion when the graveyard was laid-out in the mid 19th Century) but rather scrub-like growth in a hitherto untended graveyard. Trees can grow very quickly when allowed - I have a 25ft squirrel-planted oak in my garden that can be no more than 18 years old (probably less) - and there is an abundance of green places locally for wild-life, including my garden (!). Careful thought might allow some of the trees to remain (particularly around boundaries) when the remaining graveyard is cleared. The trees are both quite well established (after say 30 years of growth) AND unplanned.

[henryb]

I think both locations are incredibly beautiful and I don't think there are enough wild places like this in London. Yes we are lucky in the south of the borough but if you take it the context of the wider area then there isn't enough. There is a commitment from the Major's Office in the London Plan to increase woodland habitats by 30 hectares in the next 15 years not decrease them.

Clearing these areas will only a give a few years of provision.

[Loz]

Out of interest, if this work isn't done what will be the alternative for burial sites in Southwark?

[Siduhe]

Loz Wrote:

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

> Out of interest, if this work isn't done what will

> be the alternative for burial sites in Southwark?

It depends what you mean by "work". The works at COC are part of a plan to also carry out works at Camberwell New Cemetery to provide an additional 1,000 plots there. Other than that, there are no current plans to use any alternative land for burials in Southwark.

I think it's also worth looking at the area that is planned to be cleared. It's not the area subscribed by the two long paths which lead down to the open green area which backs onto Rydeale. That's the area that people can currently walk in, has lots of historic monuments etc.

It's the area to the left of that (if you look North) which runs down the side of Underhill Road and which is pretty much inaccessible (there was a kind of track you could use to cut through to Underhill which came out exactly where the old yellow salt container was, and people would use the salt container as a step up to get over the fence to cut through the cemetery). I know this because I tried to walk in that area a fair number of times before the fencing went up and other than the track coming out at Underhill, I couldn't find any way in or around that area.

I should say I completely get why people would like to preserve the right hand area which leads down only Ryedale as a wilder space to walk in - although I still think burials are the primary purpose. But the argument can't be as strong for a wild area which is inaccessible to everyone (although I guess that's where the nature issues come in most strongly as it's definitely an undisturbed area).

[edhistory]

edborders Wrote:

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

> After the ten acres of woods are cut down and 200

> dead people a year are buried, in 10 to 15 years

> there will be no more space in the 10 acres for

> more dead bodies and the woods will have been

> lost. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15

> years. 10 to 15 years.

10 acres is 48400 square yards.

Let's say each burial plot is 2 square yards.

How many burial plots can be placed in 10 acres?

How long will the 10 acres last with 200 new unshared burial plots each year?

I can't get the numbers to work.

John K

[Sue]

edhistory Wrote:

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

> edborders Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > After the ten acres of woods are cut down and

> 200

> > dead people a year are buried, in 10 to 15

> years

> > there will be no more space in the 10 acres for

> > more dead bodies and the woods will have been

> > lost. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15

> > years. 10 to 15 years.

>

> 10 acres is 48400 square yards.

>

> Let's say each burial plot is 2 square yards.

>

> How many burial plots can be placed in 10 acres?

>

> How long will the 10 acres last with 200 new

> unshared burial plots each year?

>

> I can't get the numbers to work.

>

> John K

Nor can I.

[henryb]

COC is a 30 acre site. 10 acres is the wooded part in the north. The North west corner (area Z) which is the condoned off part ( although it only fully cordoned off when the campaign to save it started, before there was easy access and well trodden path through). It is about 3 acres and they are going to get around 800 plots. That is around 4 supply. Areas J, K and L which are the wooded lanes areas- they won't be fully developed until other areas in the New Cemetery are used up but they are planning felling all the younger trees this year. When it is developed they estimate another 1060 plots. Then there area H which is the lovely meadow area which houses on Ryedale back on to - that is down as another 480 plots.

So 2200 plots - 10 years supply at 220 a year.

[edhistory]

henryb Wrote:

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

> 10 acres is the wooded part

> It is about 3 acres and they are going

> to get around 800 plots.

Still can't get the numbers to work, even on this sub-set.

That runs out at 18 square yards per burial plot.

Where is your source?

John K

[henryb]

Regarding the burial numbers from "Camberwell Old Cemetery - London's Forgotten Valhalla" by Ron Woolacott 1984.

The total burials were:

1861: 5,433

1866: 12,785

1874: 30,000+

1893: 100,000+

1900: 117,030

1927: 265,310

1948: 273,851

1956: 279,714

1984: 300,000 +

In the Acknowledgements the original cemetery records and documents are mentioned.

[henryb]

Southwark Cemetery Strategy. They presented it at the public meeting in Feb and it is one their website.

[edhistory]

henryb Wrote:

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

> Regarding the burial numbers from "Camberwell Old

> Cemetery - London's Forgotten Valhalla" by Ron

> Woolacott 1984.

>

> The total burials were:

> 1861: 5,433

> 1866: 12,785

> 1874: 30,000+

> 1893: 100,000+

> 1900: 117,030

> 1927: 265,310

> 1948: 273,851

> 1956: 279,714

> 1984: 300,000 +

>

> In the Acknowledgements the original cemetery

> records and documents are mentioned.

I'll phone Ron in the morning and find out why he had to use 10k figures in the middle of the sequence.

[edhistory]

henryb Wrote:

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

> Southwark Cemetery Strategy. They presented it at

> the public meeting in Feb and it is one their

> website.

I have this document.

I can't see anything in the tables on pages 47-51 that match your numbers.

What am I missing?

John K

[edborders]

John K,

Henry has given you the facts and you won't accept them.

10 acres of woods will be destroyed for 10 to 15 years of burial "provision" with nothing to show for it, only a need to find another ten acres for the next 10 to 15 years. 10 to 15 years.

Lewis Schaffer,

Come see me at the Museum of Comedy this Sunday at 6PM.

"Lewis Schaffer, International Man of Misery"

I am a real person who loves wild woods.

(well, as wild as they can get in Zone 2)

[edhistory]

edborders Wrote:

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

> John K,

>

> Henry has given you the facts and you won't accept

> them.

Please let me know where the facts are.

Thank you.

John K

[henryb]

I have a hard copy of the presentation they gave in February but it is late now. I will see I can find a a link tomorrow. The situation is very dynamic at the moment and Southwark's regularly changing their plans and what is up on their site.

Yes I saw the 10k sequence as I was typing it out. Camberwell borough population was around 270k at the time so a death rate of 5k a year does sound reasonable considering the circumstances and times. Was everyone going in COC at the time? Were there burials from other Parishes?

However the actual number is not really the point. The question is these graves and cemeteries are an important link to our past and heritage, especially to those who have family roots here. That applies to the common graves as much it does the private graves. I really can't see how wide spread re-use will not lead to big lose of that.

[kiera]

The council will not be using every inch of space for burial - there will, for example, be tarmac (or similar) roads for hearses.There are also a few graves from the 1940s in area Z which are still being visited and cared for, which the council will have to respect. Henryb's figures add up to 2340 and do not take into account another 775 burial plots proposed for the remainder of the woodland - the area behind the gardens in Forest Hill Rd, so 3115 new lawn graves in total in the woodland, as part of the council's plans to cater for burials for the next 15 years. These figures are in the cabinet decision of 19.06.2012 page 9 para 44 which is on the council's website:- 480 new lawn grave burial plots in the meadow behind Ryedale (H1), 1000 in area Z (the area currently fenced-off) and 1060 burial plots in sites J,K and L (the woodland paths area) plus 775 in H2 and H3 (the rest of the woodland - behind the gardens in Forest Hill Road).There are a further 430 elsewhere (G1)in the Old Cemetery, making a total of 3745 new lawn graves. The only change since then is that, because of practical difficulties, the figure for area Z (the next area to be used) has been revised down from 1000 to 800, so now 3545 in total. As Henryb has said, this will have a huge impact on the character and appearance of the cemetery.

[edhistory]

The non-parishioner burials for the years I have data:

1905 105

1906 122

1907 115

1908 124

[spark67]

I noticed that the cemetery is part of the green chain walk, so are the council encouraging people to use it as a recreational space ? I also noticed today that they are laying new foundations for some of the old wobbly memorials which have been removed but will be returned when the new foundations are set. I live right by this place and love the peace and quiet when I cut through on my way to and from work, some of the memorials give a fascinating incite into local history, including a memorial to members of a local family who tradgicaly died in the empress of ireland ship disaster which sank in Canada in 1914 in which over 1000 perished. ( I only learnt of this piece of history after googling after I saw the memorial)

Love the wooded area ( or what ever it is ) especially the green clearing in the middle, Though I do feel some of the stones look a bit dodgy and probably need removing before they topple on someone :/

[Borderlands]

Aren't the cemeteries, Sydenham Hill Wood, Dulwich Woods, the golf course, Peckham Rye Common (and park), Honor Oak all designated Metropolitan Open Land and thereby protected to some extent in planning terms? All have amenity, social, habitat and landscape importance arising from their history (and some of that will pre-date their use as, say, burial plots.