“An Invaluable Woodland”

When Teignbridge District Council voted unanimously to confirm the Woodland Tree Preservation Order at Kingsteignton, one of the most compelling parts of the meeting came from the Council’s own Tree Officer.

His assessment was professional, evidence-based, and delivered on the public record. It explains exactly why this woodland needs protecting, and why its loss cannot simply be brushed aside or offset elsewhere.

This article sets out the key points from that assessment.

Not recent, not incidental, and not replaceable

The Tree Officer was clear from the outset that this woodland is not a recent growth or an incidental patch of trees.

It is a long-established, naturally regenerated broadleaf woodland, which developed following the abandonment of historic clay workings and has remained largely undisturbed for over a century.

Historic mapping showed woodland presence as early as the late 1800s. Aerial photography from 1946 confirmed it was already well established nearly 80 years ago. Crucially, this continuity demonstrates more than age. It indicates stable soils, mature ecological processes, and long-term habitat value.

As the officer explained, that level of uninterrupted woodland continuity is now rare in Britain, particularly on the urban fringe.

A defining landscape and community feature

The woodland sits on the edge of Kingsteignton and functions as a green buffer in an otherwise developed landscape. The Tree Officer described it as the last substantial area of continuous woodland in the area, clearly visible from surrounding roads and neighbourhoods.

This visibility was central to its high public amenity value. Its presence shapes the character of the area. Its loss or fragmentation would not be subtle or localised. It would represent a clear and noticeable change to the landscape.

The woodland also provides ecological connectivity through a fragmented urban setting, linking green corridors that would otherwise be severed.

Woodland structure that only time creates

Inside the woodland, the Tree Officer described a fully developed structure: canopy, understory, shrub layer, ground flora, deadwood, varied age classes, and ongoing natural regeneration.

This is not the profile of a plantation or managed planting scheme. It is the signature of a woodland that has been present for a long time, without intensive management.

The presence of numerous naturally regenerated oak trees in good condition was highlighted as a key indicator of maturity. Importantly, oak is only one part of a diverse native mix including ash, beech, sycamore, birch, hazel, hawthorn and holly. Together, these form a resilient and biodiverse system.

As the officer stated plainly, this level of structural biodiversity cannot be recreated in the short or medium term.

Why a TPO was necessary

The Tree Officer addressed objections directly.

He confirmed that Tree Preservation Orders and mineral permissions operate under separate legal regimes. The existence of mineral interests does not override the duty to protect amenity where it is justified.

The purpose of the TPO is not to block lawful activity by default, but to ensure that any tree removal is properly assessed and justified, rather than allowing premature or unnecessary clearance.

Emergency and essential safety works remain exempt under existing regulations. None of the objections raised outweighed the woodland’s significant amenity, ecological, historic or landscape value.

The professional judgement that mattered most

Perhaps the most powerful moment came when the Tree Officer stepped out of formal policy language and spoke from experience.

Drawing on a lifetime in the profession, and having grown up in a woodland himself, he described this site as:

The best example of a naturally self-seeded woodland I have ever seen.

He emphasised that the woodland was not planted or designed. It developed naturally, shaped by time and natural processes, following the abandonment of clay works. Woodlands of this type, particularly so close to urban areas, are becoming increasingly rare.

That judgement matters. It explains why this woodland is not interchangeable with new planting elsewhere, and why its value cannot be reduced to a simple replacement calculation.

Why this evidence matters going forward

The confirmation of the TPO was not an emotional decision. It was grounded in professional assessment, historic evidence, landscape analysis, and ecological reality.

The Tree Officer’s comments make one thing clear: this woodland is an established and irreplaceable resource. Its protection reflects current planning policy, environmental responsibility, and the public interest.

Thanks to the confirmed TPO, that protection is now permanent.