Contractor that cut back ancient oak in London park identified

A mystery contractor who chainsawed an ancient oak in north London for the Toby Carvery restaurant chain has been identified by The Guardian, prompting more questions about the incident.The unauthorised partial felling of the 500-year-old oak a year ago on Friday in Whitewebbs Park, Enfield, prompted widespread public outrage and questions in parliament.Mitchells & Butler Retail (MBR), which owns Toby Carvery, claimed it was advised by its contractor that the work was necessary for safety reasons as the tree was diseased. But numerous experts, including an investigator from the Forest Commission, found it was healthy and showed little sign of needing to be felled.Until now the identity of the contractors involved, who were photographed using vans without company logos during the work, has been kept under wraps.The Guardian has seen documentary evidence showing the work was undertaken by Ground Control, which describes itself as “a leading maintenance business and biodiversity expert” and has a turnover of £190m.Ground Control agreed to remove the tree for MBR which the former said was necessary to protect a public area, citing a large split in one of its main branches, documents show.Dr Ed Pyne, a senior conversation adviser at the Woodland Trust, said: “It is tragic it has taken a year to find out who was behind the felling of this tree. There has been a lack of transparency throughout, so now it is time they answered some questions.“What is the evidence that the tree was dangerous? What level of qualification and competency did Ground Control operatives have when they made this decision? We haven’t heard any solid justification for why this tree was removed.”The oak’s trunk, or main stem, is all that remains of the tree after all its branches were chainsawed off. It shows no sign of snapping or splitting, according to Russell Miller, a specialist in ancient trees. He said the document appeared to refer to an “open cavity” on one the main branches felled by contractors.Miller said: “Any tree professional would describe that as an old semi-occluded tear-out wound … it was obviously years old at the time of the fell and not a hazard. And even if someone thought it was a hazard, you wouldn’t have to cut down the whole tree.”Enfield-council" class="entity-link entity-organization" data-entity-id="91881" data-entity-type="organization">Enfield council, which owns the site in Whitewebbs Park, has started legal action to evict Toby Carvery after MBR refused to apologise or offer compensation for the damage to the tree, which was done without the council’s permission.Ground Control has a specialist team of arborists who usually assess trees and conduct tree surgery and felling. But sources claim the arborist team were not involved in assessing or chainsawing the Toby Carvery oak.Instead, sources claim, the work was led by Ground Control’s grounds maintenance team, which has less expertise on trees. This claim raises further questions about MBR’s justification for felling the tree.In a statement last April, MBR said: “Our specialist arboriculture contractors made the assessment that the split and dead wood posed a serious health and safety risk and advised that the tree was unsafe and should be removed.”A spokesperson for Toby Carvery said: “There will be no further comment due to ongoing legal proceedings.”Sources close to Ground Control claim that an internal review of the incident by the firm was conducted by a contracts manager rather than a tree specialist.The Guardian approached Ground Control for comment. Its chief executive, Jason Knights, said: “As this is an ongoing legal matter, Ground Control is not in a position to comment on the issues you raise.”MBR is majority-owned by the investment company Enic, which also has strong financial links to Tottenham Hotspur football club. In its 2024 annual accounts, MBR disclosed that it had entered into an option arrangement with Spurs to buy the lease on the Toby Carvery site in Whitewebbs Park.The club has denied that the felling of the oak had any connection to its plans to build a women’s football training academy on 17 hectares of adjacent land in the park.Miller, who is part of the group Guardians of Whitewebbs, which is campaigning againsts Spurs’ plans for the park, said: “The claim that the tree was hazardous has been thoroughly rebutted by numerous experts, including a recent independent Forestry Commission investigation.”Last year Enfield-council" class="entity-link entity-organization" data-entity-id="91881" data-entity-type="organization">Enfield council referred the felling of the tree to the police, who refused to investigate, claiming it was a civil rather than criminal matter.Miller said: “Why will the police not investigate what happened? Why does the law not apply to corporations? Why was this tree destroyed and who decided to destroy it?”The Guardians of Whitewebbs group has been granted a judicial review against Enfield’s decision to grant planning permission for Spurs’ training complex in the park. It will be heard in June.The prospect of Spurs being relegated from the Premier League may also scupper the plans.