Scottish Forestry - information related to tree felling adjacent to Scorguie Road, Inverness: EIR release

Information requested

I have a couple of additional points and questions to raise based on your responses.

1. The landowner/developer states that he kept below the 5m3 quarterly limit. However Scottish Forestry have not confirmed if this is indeed the case. Is there proof that he actually kept within the limit, or have you simply accepted his word? It is generally understood that 5m3 is around the volume of a Transit van. The amount of timber removed from the site would fill a transit van several times over, so it is very hard to accept that the quarterly limit was adhered to. How was this assessment made?

2. Was a subsequent visit undertaken after the removal of the final trees around the 2nd March? No assessment of the quantity of that batch of trees was contained in the initial documents provided.

3. Over 50 tall, mature trees were removed without prior permission. Many of these trees had trunks which exceeded 1m in diameter. If it is demonstrated that this exceeded the permitted quantity, will enforcement action be taken against the landowner and/ or his contractor?

4. Some trees did overhang the road, but none were posing an immediate danger. A competent tree surgeon could very easily have tidied up the trees and removed the overhanging branches without destroying all the trees. The developers own ecological survey (attached) makes reference to these trees having a viable future of around 20 more years, with no mention of any dangerous trees. It also makes reference to a Badger path along southwest edge of site (right beside the trees that were removed), as well as references to other protected wildlife such as bats, which I have seen many times flying between the affected trees. This site has (or at least had at the time) significant ecological value. On this basis, should permission to fell not have been sought in advance?

5. This is Green Network land, Amenity land, well used by the community. As such and as per guidelines, should a consultation have been undertaken prior to the destruction and removal of these trees?

6. In light of all this information, should Permission to Fell have been sought in advance? And, if said permission to fell had been applied for, would it have been granted?

7. Is there currently any investigation still ongoing into the felling and removal of these trees?

Response

As the information you have requested is ‘environmental information’ for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.

1. The landowner/developer states that he kept below the 5m3 quarterly limit. However Scottish Forestry have not confirmed if this is indeed the case. Is there proof that he actually kept within the limit, or have you simply accepted his word? It is generally understood that 5m3 is around the volume of a Transit van. The amount of timber removed from the site would fill a transit van several times over, so it is very hard to accept that the quarterly limit was adhered to. How was this assessment made?

Timber measurements were undertaken by Scottish Forestry on 24 February 2026 in accordance with industry best practice conventions, as set out in the standard references for tree and timber measurement in British forestry: Forestry Commission Booklet 39, Forest Mensuration: A Handbook for Practitioners and Forestry Commission Booklet 49 and Timber Measurement: A Field Guide. The calculated volume of felled timber was 2.242 cubic metres. The timber calculations were provided in the previous information request and are recorded in the MS Excel spreadsheet titled “Timber measure”.

2. Was a subsequent visit undertaken after the removal of the final trees around the 2nd March? No assessment of the quantity of that batch of trees was contained in the initial documents provided.

Scottish Forestry revisited the site on 27 March 2026, during which we observed further tree felling had occurred since our previous visit to measure timber on 24 February 2026 however, based on previous calculations of standing trees, we were content the total volume of felled timber remained below the 5 cubic metre threshold.

3. Over 50 tall, mature trees were removed without prior permission. Many of these trees had trunks which exceeded 1m in diameter. If it is demonstrated that this exceeded the permitted quantity, will enforcement action be taken against the landowner and/or his contractor?

Scottish Forestry calculated the volume of felled timber to be below the 5 cubic metre threshold per calendar quarter and is therefore exempt from the requirement to obtain a felling permission from Scottish Forestry.

Under section 9 of EIRs, I have a duty to provide advice and guidance. As such, if it turned out that what you suggest was correct, and tree felling resulted in more than 5 cubic metres of timber being removed, Scottish Forestry would have a range of enforcement options available. However, to protect the fairness of any possible legal action, we cannot say what steps Scottish Forestry might take in that scenario. If Scottish Forestry were considering action, that information could not be shared at this stage, as it would be exempt from disclosure under EIR Regulation 10(5)(b) (course of justice) until any proceedings were finished.

For clarity, the exemption referenced to above “applies to investigations or enquiries conducted by any public authority and may relate to current proceedings or to proceeding likely to take place in the future. It could include any information which, if disclosed, could prejudice the enforcement or appropriate administration of law, which includes the prevention, investigation or detection of a crime, or the apprehension or prosecution of offenders”.

4. Some trees did overhang the road, but none were posing an immediate danger. A competent tree surgeon could very easily have tidied up the trees and removed the overhanging branches without destroying all the trees. The developers own ecological survey (attached) makes reference to these trees having a viable future of around 20 more years, with no mention of any dangerous trees. It also makes reference to a Badger path along southwest edge of site (right beside the trees that were removed), as well as references to other protected wildlife such as bats, which I have seen many times flying between the affected trees. This site has (or at least had at the time) significant ecological value. On this basis, should permission to fell not have been sought in advance?

Felling permission from Scottish Forestry is required only where no statutory exemptions apply and where no relevant directions are in force. Scottish Forestry’s investigation confirmed that the tree felling at this location was exempt from the requirement to obtain our felling permission. As such, Scottish Forestry has determined that no unauthorised felling occurred on this site in breach of The Forestry and Land Management Act 2018 as described by section 23 of this act. This is because an exemption, under section 24 of The Forestry and Land Management Act 2018 applies in this case. As such, Scottish Forestry has no authority to intervene in the felling that has taken place at this site.

Under my section 9 of EIRs duty to provide advice and guidance, I would like to inform you that Scottish Forestry is not the appropriate body to respond to the issues you have raised related to wildlife habitats or potential criminal activity related to habitats. If you believe that a wildlife crime may have been committed, you should report the matter to Police Scotland, who are the primary competent authority responsible for the investigation of wildlife crime in Scotland.

5. This is Green Network land, Amenity land, well used by the community. As such and as per guidelines, should a consultation have been undertaken prior to the destruction and removal of these trees?

Scottish Forestry is not required to consult on tree felling proposals that are exempt from the requirement to obtain our felling permission.

6. In light of all this information, should Permission to Fell have been sought in advance? And, if said permission to fell had been applied for, would it have been granted?

As outlined above, Scottish Forestry’s investigation confirmed that the tree felling at this location was exempt from the requirement to obtain our felling permission. Scottish Forestry assesses all felling permission applications submitted for our approval in line with the requirements set out in our Felling Permission Application Guidance and in accordance with the legal requirements and principles of good forestry practice defined in the UK Forestry Standard.

It is not possible for Scottish Forestry to hypothesise as to whether a Felling Permission would have been granted in this case.

7. Is there currently any investigation still ongoing into the felling and removal of these trees?

Scottish Forestry confirmed that the tree felling at this location was exempt from the requirement for our felling permission, we have therefore concluded our investigation.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.