New opportunity to save the woods!! Deadline Friday 23rd

[Otta]

But seriously, let's not start name calling. Lewis for all of the nonsense he's written, has not been rude or personal.

[nxjen]

I was highly offended when he suggested I worked for Southwark Council.

[Sue]

He did accuse people of lying to him and laughing at him, but gave no specific examples.

It was also him who first used the word "tossing", albeit in relation to the council workers putting logs into the nature reserve. You must admit it was difficult to resist the temptation. I did resist for some time ....

But I agree, on the whole he has not been personally rude to people.

It's not clear to me what he's hoping to achieve by this emergency meeting, unless he really is intending to chain himself to the trees.

[Otta]

Maybe he just wanted an excuse to go to the pub.

[edborders]

Save Southwark Woods meets Tonight Tuesdays 730PM at the Herne Tavern on Forest Hill Road. This week is obviously an emergency as the Council are acting now on plans to cut down trees, drive roads and mound over the dead.

To see Southwark Council lying to us, rewatch the ITV video and see the Councillor in Charge of Burial Darren Merrill getting caught out by the reporter.

https://youtu.be/0eklxkk30bQ

This week we have been lied to by the Council. They said that it doesn't need permission from the Church of England to cut down the trees and mound over the graves in Camberwell Old Cemetery. They said they only needed permission to actually bury the bodies. Like they wouldn't need permission to tear down the building, only to put the new building up.

Darren told a full council meeting (and residents surrounding the Cemetery) that the entire Old Cemetery project was to be less than one ( 1 ) acre in size. Their website today says three acres. 700 graves and still keep the beauty? Come on.

http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk and read all about.

Lewis Schaffer

Nunhead, head cold with coughing and sneezing, and basically a non-drinker (I have tried)

[Penguin68]

They said that it doesn't need permission from the Church of England to cut down the trees and mound over the graves in Camberwell Old Cemetery.

They don't. Church permission is only required when bodies are to be disturbed - and then ONLY for public burials. Which stands to reason. The Church believes that bodies once buried should not then be disturbed, unless clearly necessary. Cutting down trees and mounding over burials doesn't disturb the bodies buried there. Southwark needs permission from nobody (other than its own councilors) to manage its own cemeteries where this doesn't involve disturbing public burials.

[dbboy]

Give him his dues, he has not been rude.

I do wonder what he and his tribe hope to achieve from the emergency meeting. At this stage surely they recognise that the authorities and elected representatives neither wish to entertain or engage in conversation with him and co. I suspect that this is due to the continued bombardment of erroneous information they push out, in an attempt to get a reaction. As much as they must be wishing he and co would go away, somehow I think they are going to continue with their impersonation of being an annoying wasp.

[edborders]

Sorry but

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Church permission is only required

> when bodies are to be disturbed - and then ONLY

> for public burials.

According to the The Diocese Registrar Richard Hastings

"The Council must obtain consent from the Consistory Court of the Diocese in the form of a faculty before any works within the consecrated areas may take place" and "the Consistory Court has not granted permission for any works to take place, as due process with respect to those who have objected must first be undertaken."

[Aerial video of the 12 acres of Nunhead Cemetery-style woods we are going to lose. https://youtu.be/b76wj7BO8yI ]

The Council decided to jump the gun as they have to cut down the trees before bird nesting season.

We meet with the Church tomorrow at 11PM.

Lewis Schaffer

Meeting tonight at the Herne.730PM

[Sue]

edborders Wrote:

> The Council decided to jump the gun as they have

> cut down the trees before bird nesting season.

But surely it's a good thing that they are taking this into consideration?

[edborders]

LOL. Thank you, Sue.

Added - Sorry, I thought you were kidding. They don't care about the birds. They care that they have a legal requirement to not cut down trees during the nesting season. They probably figure it is a better bet to mess with the Church. And the nesting season may have already arrived, due to the unusually warm winter.

Sue Wrote:

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

> edborders Wrote:

>

>

> > The Council decided to jump the gun as they

> have

> > cut down the trees before bird nesting season.

>

>

> But surely it's a good thing that they are taking

> this into consideration?

[Sue]

edborders Wrote:

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

> LOL. Thank you, Sue.

>

>

> Added - Sorry, I thought you were kidding. They

> don't care about the birds. They care that they

> have a legal requirement to not cut down trees

> during the nesting season.

How do you know they don't care about the birds?

I used to work for a London council (not Southwark) and I can tell you that they cared a great deal about the birds, and it was not because of any legal requirement.

Any contractor working for the council who interfered with nesting birds found themselves in a great deal of trouble.

[edborders]

Sue Wrote:

> How do you know they don't care about the birds?

Southwark Council has made the decision to cut down twelve (12) acres of woods in inner London to put in 4800 graves.

If they placed birds over burial provision in Southwark they wouldn't do that. And they wouldn't be doing at this time.

This is the decision that Darren Merrill, Peter John, Victoria Mills, her husband Gavin Edwards and the rest of Southwark Labour has made.

Lewis Schaffer

Meeting tonight at the Herne Tavern at 730. All welcome who love birds over burial provision in Southwark.

[Sue]

edborders Wrote:

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

>

> Southwark Council has made the decision to cut

> down twelve (12) acres of woods in inner London to

> put in 4800 graves.

>

> If they placed birds over burial provision in

> Southwark they wouldn't do that. And they wouldn't

> be doing at this time.

Hang on a minute.

You are now talking about two completely different issues.

The birds who might have nested in the trees the council are about to cut down will be able to nest in other trees - of which there are plenty.

That's a completely different issue to timing of the tree cutting to avoid disturbing nests which have already been built by the birds.

ETA: To clarify, that's disturbing nests already built by the birds and being used for the current year's nesting, not (as below) old nests which may be being used for roosting.

[Penguin68]

edborders wrote:-

The Council must obtain consent from the Consistory Court of the Diocese in the form of a faculty before any works within the consecrated areas may take place

This is not (in London at least) so for local authority graveyards, although it is so for parish churches and churchyards. In fact a Diocesan Faculty (granted by the Diocesan Chancellor via application to the Diocesan Registry) must be granted for 'any substantial alteration to consecrated land within a municipal cemetery including removal of headstones and kerbsets'.

In this case the 'consecrated land' is being restored to its original condition by the removal of scrub growth. I do not believe the church can interfere with the cutting down of trees in a muncipal cemetery. Issues of mounding, where this is not removing headstones and kerbsets may not be relevant - it might not be a 'substantial alteration'. However new roadways and paths may be considered a substantial alteration, if in a consecrated area (not all of a municipal cemetery will be consecrated, although areas with public graves will be). I suspect that the restoration of existing paths now overgrown might not be considered a 'substantial alteration'.

If your advice is that a full Consistory Court is required I believe that to be in error - it is a far more standard procedure - it should be noted that the Church is generally in favour of re-use (assuming that bodies are treated with respect). The Church is considering (probably favourably) the move to lift and deepen from the previous reburial in (different) consecrated grounds - but this has not yet been approved. Mounding, of course, would not require re-burial.

However the law regarding re-use of Private Graves is different in Southwark from the rest of London. Indeed, re-use of private graves may actually be forbidden in Southwark, until legislation is changed.

You may also wish to note that Faculties are granted for specific areas, and are not (unless so specified) a blanket approval for all consecrated areas within a specific cemetery. Here is something you could focus on to keep Southwark straight.

[LauraW]

To save their habitat from destruction we need photos of the birds nesting in Camberwell Old Cemetery now. Send to [email protected] asap thanks!

[Penguin68]

Birds won't be nesting now. There are sufficient trees locally that when they do come to nest, they will find somewhere appropriate.

[Sue]

LauraW Wrote:

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

> To save their habitat from destruction we need

> photos of the birds nesting in Camberwell Old

> Cemetery now. Send to [email protected]

> asap thanks!

I think you'll find it rather unlikely that birds are nesting in January.

This bird thing has only just been mentioned after eleven pages of thread.

Your group didn't seem to care much about it before. Clutching at straws springs to mind.

[dbboy]

They continue to be clutching at straws when mentioning hibernating bees, butterflies, bats and wanting Swampy!!!

[LauraW]

We have had verbal reports of nesting and this is why I'm asking.

[Penguin68]

You need to distinguish between roosting and nesting. All birds roost at night (owls excepted). The green parakeets roost in COC.

[edhistory]

Report of the emergency meeting?

[Sue]

Well, according to Lewis above, they are meeting with the church today at 11pm (sic).

So perhaps we will know more in the early hours of tomorrow .....

[Otta]

edhistory Wrote:

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

> Report of the emergency meeting?

They had beer and talked about birds.

I wish I'd gone, it sounds like my 20s.

[BrandNewGuy]

For purposes of tree removal and site clearance, the nesting season is taken to be 1st March ? 31st July inclusive, but the nesting period for specific birds at specific sites might start before this and extend beyond it.

In this particular case, I would say that crows, magpies, blackbirds and wood pigeons might start breeding earlier than 1st March, but not as early as the end of January. And as Sue says, the law in this case is to do with breeding and not using nests as roosts during the winter ? which is rare for these species in any case.

[Sue]

Well, assuming Lewis/edborders meant their meeting with the church was at 11am, not 11pm, the group must now have some information to impart?

Otta, :))