As you may have seen, following Natural England’s decision to designate the woodland which borders the Triangle as ‘ancient’, they then did an abrupt U-turn and decided that it wasn’t.
Despite what you may read on social media pages and in local press, we (and others) remain unconvinced that this complex matter has been conclusively and comprehensively determined, and will keep this under review.
This surprising turn of events was precipitated by an arboricultural report submitted on behalf of OUFC on 18 July from Aspect Arboriculture, who specialise in providing advice to developers.
Their report quite categorically denied the existence of ancient woodland based on mapping data. To count as "ancient woodland", an area must have been continuously woodland since 1600AD. It is not entirely straightforward to make this determination given that not all woodland is consistently recorded on maps.
It is disheartening (and baffling) that Natural England chose to renege so suddenly on its previous decision which was based on not only historic mapping evidence, but also ecological (incorporating archaeological evidence) and arboricultural survey reports. It is additionally disappointing that that it took OUFC such a long time to submit any evidence on this topic when FoSB raised it over two years ago.
Nobody has done more to understand the true ecological value of this woodland, than Dr Judith Webb BEM. We will remain ever grateful to her for her exceptional work in this regard. It is shocking that, despite Dr Judy Webb’s carefully-collated expert evidence presented over many survey visits, this ecologically valuable woodland will not at this time get the ‘ancient woodland’ protection that it deserves. If the stadium is built, the woodland will be subject to OUFC’s management regime including cutting back of overhanging branches and the inevitable damage arising from increased footfall, littering, light and noise pollution etc. We fear for its survival.