Network Rail's vegetation problem

[Spartacus]

This has been discussed at length on here before, but trees do NOT provide any form of slope stability - especially large trees.

The root ball is generally shallow and spreads only as far as the crown. The tree itself, particularly on a slope acts typically as a giant lever and can dislodge a fair amount of material if it moves.

Also another myth; trees CAN be worked on, trimmed or cut down at any time of year as long as the area being worked on has been identified as clear of nesting birds by a licensed environmental contractor.

Yes, I think it was a Victorian engineer who identified two types of tree, both I think quite small, that could help stabilise an unstable embankment, and ever since it’s been used as an argument for every kind of tree to remain, even though their weight is almost always more of a cause of a slip. I think he also, correctly, noted that if embankment’s even half decently constructed even those two types of tree would add nothing, and were most useful on naturally occurring slopes.

As for working on trees all year round, yes you can if you can identify no nesting, but actually identifying that can be the hardest thing when it’s in full leaf, large, and has a running line close by so you can struggle to get a good look at that side at least.

 

[RPM]

I expect a whole raft of vegetation clearance is about to commence.

Probably overly optimistic, although I hope I'm wrong. NR have the likes of the Woodland Trust, local Green Party organisations and a big NIMBY factor to contend with when carrying out necessary vegetation clearance.

 

[theageofthetra]

Probably overly optimistic, although I hope I'm wrong. NR have the likes of the Woodland Trust, local Green Party organisations and a big NIMBY factor to contend with when carrying out necessary vegetation clearance.

Who will hopefully be told that they have no involvement in the safe operation of the railway.

 

[adc82140]

Who will hopefully be told that they have no involvement in the safe operation of the railway.

It also wouldn't be a good look for the Green Party to be opposing the safe operation of the railway, thus encouraging people in to cars.

 

[RPM]

It also wouldn't be a good look for the Green Party to be opposing the safe operation of the railway, thus encouraging people in to cars.

Well they oppose HS2...

 

[===gricer===]

All lineside vegetation needs cutting back to a level shown in the Warship pictures ~ railways occupy very narrow tracts of land if you zoom out !

Tick - Safer for all.
Tick - Leaves on the line.
Tick - Easier track maintenance.
Tick - Open views.
Tick - Save money.

 

[theageofthetra]

All lineside vegetation needs cutting back to a level shown in the Warship pictures ~ railways occupy very narrow tracts of land if you zoom out !

Tick - Safer for all.
Tick - Leaves on the line.
Tick - Easier track maintenance.
Tick - Open views.
Tick - Save money.

Absolutely. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any political party, NIMBY or other self interest group unless the vegetation involved is not on railway land.

 

[Oxfordblues]

I have in mind places like Proof House Junction and Grand Junction south of Birmingham New Street where the bush and weed growth is so profuse that there is a serious risk of signals being obscured, adhesion and train-detection issues in autumn, a general air of neglect (combined with rampant graffiti vandalism) and eventual structural failure from weed-growth in cutting-walls. The whole scene is a disgrace. Whoever is responsible should be brought to account.

 

[The Planner]

I have in mind places like Proof House Junction and Grand Junction south of Birmingham New Street where the bush and weed growth is so profuse that there is a serious risk of signals being obscured, adhesion and train-detection issues in autumn, a general air of neglect (combined with rampant graffiti vandalism) and eventual structural failure from weed-growth in cutting-walls. The whole scene is a disgrace. Whoever is responsible should be brought to account.

Commonwealth Games next year, the railway network around Brum will be cleaner than a babies bum by the time we get there.

 

[theageofthetra]

I have in mind places like Proof House Junction and Grand Junction south of Birmingham New Street where the bush and weed growth is so profuse that there is a serious risk of signals being obscured, adhesion and train-detection issues in autumn, a general air of neglect (combined with rampant graffiti vandalism) and eventual structural failure from weed-growth in cutting-walls. The whole scene is a disgrace. Whoever is responsible should be brought to account.

Just as bad in London. Being the railway they won't be brought to account, just moved sideways.

 

[Purple Orange]

How seriously can vegetation affect the structural stability of an old Victorian viaduct (or any infrastructure for that matter really)?

 

[geoffk]

Then that’s NR‘s PR department’s responsibility to highlight the safety case for cutting the vegetation and the reasons for doing so. It’s no use hiding behind any excuse. Just look at the nasty incident at my depot where a train struck a fallen tree recently and the driver was injured and had the potential to be so much worse but for sheer luck. Inaction by NR after a survey highlighted these trees as high risk in this incident was disgraceful.

NR could respond by agreeing to plant, or sponsor the planting of, more trees away from the lineside in return for increased lineside clearance. Another benefit would be that passengers would be able to see where they're going!

 

[SargeNpton]

How seriously can vegetation affect the structural stability of an old Victorian viaduct (or any infrastructure for that matter really)?

I have seen several walls brought down by roots of buddleas getting in between the brickwork.

 

[43096]

Whoever is responsible should be brought to account.

The usual knee-jerk reaction that is utterly pointless and achieves nothing. Given this has been an ongoing issue for 40 years or more, who exactly are you thinking “should be brought to account”?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

How seriously can vegetation affect the structural stability of an old Victorian viaduct (or any infrastructure for that matter really)?

Very seriously indeed. Once a breach is made by roots etc, decaying vegetation has an effect and then a lot more water can get in then you will have freeze-thaw cycles.

I have seen several walls brought down by roots of buddleias getting in between the brickwork.

Yep

Preservation by Prevention: Vines and Other Vegetation | Trust for Architectural Easements

Although mental images of quaint cottages and historic collegiate campuses are often filled with ivy-covered buildings, the nasty truth is that allowing ivy – and many other types of vegetation – to grow on your historic building can be extremely detrimental to its survival. Usually the method by which the plant attaches itself to the building is mechanically harmful to historic building materials. In addition, vegetation holds moisture against buildings and causes chemical deterioration of building materials. Even the growth of such small plants as mosses and lichens on historic buildings has a similar detrimental effect. Finally, substantial growth of vegetation can hide problems in the underlying wall, such as cracking or loss of mortar caused by settlement.

5 Most Common Destructive Plants in the UK

These plants are not only capable of destroying houses and buildings, but they're also difficult to control when their growth is not prevented.

billyoh.com

 

[WatcherZero]

NR could respond by agreeing to plant, or sponsor the planting of, more trees away from the lineside in return for increased lineside clearance. Another benefit would be that passengers would be able to see where they're going!

Works both ways though, im sure a lot of trees and dense vegetation was specifically planted as noise and visual barriers to protect houses along the lines.

 

[HSTEd]

Who will hopefully be told that they have no involvement in the safe operation of the railway.

Whilst you are technically correct, the railway exists because the Government continues to transfer vast sums of money to it each and every year.

Anything that damages public opinion of the railway endangers its continued existance.

There are a lot more sensible things that can be done to mitigate this beyond causing a lot of negative publicity ripping down any tree remotely near the railway.
Magnetic Track Brakes (either friction or eddy current) and RHTT type equipment on service trains for two.

Nevermind that the railway has no power to do anything outside the boundary fence, whilst leaves can and do blow around.

All lineside vegetation needs cutting back to a level shown in the Warship pictures ~ railways occupy very narrow tracts of land if you zoom out !

Tick - Safer for all.
Tick - Leaves on the line.
Tick - Easier track maintenance.
Tick - Open views.
Tick - Save money.

Ultimately, unless you have a vast army of slaves to use maintaining this horticultural desert next to the railway, clearing all this and keeping it clear will cost vastly more than the current solution.

And open views is a negative to the people who have to live next to this railway infrastructure all the time?
Passengers seeing slightly more open terrain out the window is pretty much worthless in the era of smartphones.

And honestly, the safety disbenefit of the current solutions is small compared to the costs to do anything about it.......

 

[option]

Ultimately, unless you have a vast army of slaves to use maintaining this horticultural desert next to the railway, clearing all this and keeping it clear will cost vastly more than the current solution.

And honestly, the safety disbenefit of the current solutions is small compared to the costs to do anything about it.......

What is the current solution?

Works both ways though, im sure a lot of trees and dense vegetation was specifically planted as noise and visual barriers to protect houses along the lines.

Some trees were. They tend to be evergreen, & planted at the edge of the railway/station area, so away from the running lines.

These are Corsican pine.

Cheltenham Racecourse Station

Cheltenham Racecourse station, 28th March 1990.

www.flickr.com

In many areas, it is the housing that has come later.

 

[HSTEd]

What is the current solution?

Leaf fall timetables, defensive driving, RHTT runs etc etc etc.

 

[717001]

Same happened at Hadley Wood, and NR begun to replant a lot of trees that were cut back. To be honest, it DID look like overkill and the cutting was done quite some distance from the ECML, but whatever the specifics - there was a backlash from the community to try and stop NR cutting back vegetation and trees - and by the sound of it, this is commonplace all over the country.

Another form of NIMBYism because I'm sure most people wouldn't mind trees being cut down elsewhere (in reality, I suspect a lot of people aren't that concerned about the environmental issues)

Following the issues at Hadley Wood, there was a review involving a wide range of stakeholders, which led to a new NR protocol balancing various needs and desires. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/network-rail-vegetation-management-review
This protocol was then followed in work done on the Hertford Loop - not my line, but I attended one of the pre-work public consultation sessions (others may know more about how the actual work went).

A project to develop a new Network Rail hedge is ongoing at Hadley Wood, in conjunction with the Tree Council and other bodies.

 

[MarkyT]

Those calling for an anti tree pogrom are rushing to judgement. There are other solutions and even if NR took a chainsaw to every tree on their property, there are plenty of places where leaves from trees on other peoples land trespass on the railway in huge numbers in autumn.
The explosive growth in vegetation generally, not just next to railway lines, is only partly down changes in management and lack of steam loco sparks to set small trackside fires. The increased concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has also been a factor, so more clearance and trimming work is required to maintain a steady state. For anyone who doubts this hypothesis I point out that commercial greenhouses pipe in additional CO2 to increase yields for certain crops.

 

[AMD]

For those who think Network Rail have no plan, they do have one. The problem is that the network is a substantial beast and the forecast is that NR are still a good number of years out from getting vegetation fully down to size.

 

[Wokingham]

they can't even clean the lineside scrap rails and building waste left everywhere, shame they cant have some sort of scrap wagon with a small crane, might not be easy with overhead cables

 

[WatcherZero]

They completely removed all the vegetation on stretches of the Atherton line about a year and a half ago, already its back to dense shrubbery punctuated by 3-4ft self sown juvenile trees. You cant just do one clearance you have to keep clearing it or it simply regrows.

 

[Brush 4]

Yes, it needs to be an annual visit to each line to cut back new growth. The old track gangs managed it just fine in steam days, as many old photos of neat and tidy linesides illustrate.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Yes, it needs to be an annual visit to each line to cut back new growth. The old track gangs managed it just fine in steam days, as many old photos of neat and tidy linesides illustrate.

They used to delibera set fire to it in some places. Certainly outside our house in the 1960s.

 

[theageofthetra]

Whilst you are technically correct, the railway exists because the Government continues to transfer vast sums of money to it each and every year.

Anything that damages public opinion of the railway endangers its continued existance.

There are a lot more sensible things that can be done to mitigate this beyond causing a lot of negative publicity ripping down any tree remotely near the railway.
Magnetic Track Brakes (either friction or eddy current) and RHTT type equipment on service trains for two.

Nevermind that the railway has no power to do anything outside the boundary fence, whilst leaves can and do blow around.



Ultimately, unless you have a vast army of slaves to use maintaining this horticultural desert next to the railway, clearing all this and keeping it clear will cost vastly more than the current solution.

And open views is a negative to the people who have to live next to this railway infrastructure all the time?
Passengers seeing slightly more open terrain out the window is pretty much worthless in the era of smartphones.

And honestly, the safety disbenefit of the current solutions is small compared to the costs to do anything about it.......

Whilst you are technically correct, the railway exists because the Government continues to transfer vast sums of money to it each and every year.

Anything that damages public opinion of the railway endangers its continued existance.

There are a lot more sensible things that can be done to mitigate this beyond causing a lot of negative publicity ripping down any tree remotely near the railway.
Magnetic Track Brakes (either friction or eddy current) and RHTT type equipment on service trains for two.

Nevermind that the railway has no power to do anything outside the boundary fence, whilst leaves can and do blow around.



Ultimately, unless you have a vast army of slaves to use maintaining this horticultural desert next to the railway, clearing all this and keeping it clear will cost vastly more than the current solution.

And open views is a negative to the people who have to live next to this railway infrastructure all the time?
Passengers seeing slightly more open terrain out the window is pretty much worthless in the era of smartphones.

And honestly, the safety disbenefit of the current solutions is small compared to the costs to do anything about it.......

Unless they are 150 years old or a previously shut line has reopened, they have chosen to live next to an active railway. The safe operation of that railway should not be affected by their choice to live next to one.

 

[HSTEd]

Unless they are 150 years old or a previously shut line has reopened, they have chosen to live next to an active railway. The safe operation of that railway should not be affected by their choice to live next to one.

The railway is already safe - it is not at all clear that the proposed measures will dramatically improve safety.

And it will fundamentally alter the appearance of the railway and the degree to which it impacts neighbours.

Just because a railway has operated there previously does not mean that absolutely anything the "railway" choses to do must be accepted by the populace.

The railway has chosen to allow the vegetation to grow and it nevertheless continues to operate extremely safely, it now needs to live with the consequences of its earlier choices or it seriously risks its social licence to operate and the support of the population necessary to cover its enormous operating deficits - especially in a post coronavirus world.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

The railway is already safe - it is not at all clear that the proposed measures will dramatically improve safety.

And it will fundamentally alter the appearance of the railway and the degree to which it impacts neighbours.

Just because a railway has operated there previously does not mean that absolutely anything the "railway" choses to do must be accepted by the populace.

The railway has chosen to allow the vegetation to grow and it nevertheless continues to operate extremely safely, it now needs to live with the consequences of its earlier choices or it seriously risks its social licence to operate and the support of the population necessary to cover its enormous operating deficits - especially in a post coronavirus world.

You are grossly overstating your case. Public opinion and attitudes towards maintaining a rail network derives only slightly from those who live alongside a railway track. Most of the very large numbers who use railways and who would be inconvenienced if services were withdrawn will be far more sympathetic to a rigorously enforced policy of vegetation removal than towards a careless approach which increased their chance of being in a train accident.

 

[HSTEd]

You are grossly overstating your case. Public opinion and attitudes towards maintaining a rail network derives only slightly from those who live alongside a railway track. Most of the very large numbers who use railways and who would be inconvenienced if services were withdrawn will be far more sympathetic to a rigorously enforced policy of vegetation removal than towards a careless approach which increased their chance of being in a train accident.

You really think the wholesale obliteration of every significant plant near the railway line would only be noticed by people who live adjacent to the railway?

And then there will be the vastly increased subsidies to pay for this never ending war against nature