A long-running neighbourhood row over four trees dividing two New South Wales properties has taken an unexpected turn, with a court uncovering that one of the neighbours had been poisoning the trees throughout the dispute.
Denis Cartledge, a resident of Tenterfield in the Northern Tablelands, launched legal action against his neighbours Ranjit and Baljit Dhadlie, seeking an order that would force them to remove four trees growing on their land.
Mr Cartledge, who has lived at his property for more than 16 years, argued the four pine trees, each about 20 metres tall, posed a risk to his home if they were to fall.
He said the trees stood roughly three metres from the shared boundary on the Dhadlie family’s property and claimed they were nearing the end of their natural lives, with dead and dangerous branches hanging above.
After years of unsuccessfully trying to persuade the Dhadlies to cut the trees down, Mr Cartledge escalated the matter to the NSW Land and Environment Court.
However, his plan became unstuck when Acting Commissioner of the Court, David Galwey, inspected the trees and found Mr Cartledge had been poisoning them himself, leading to their decline.
Mr Galwey, an experienced arboricultural consultant, said he found three of the trees had a deliberate hole drilled on the southern side of their stems, which aligned with the condition of the trees’ crowns.
‘The pattern of dieback is consistent with the effects of poison being applied to trees through drill holes,’ Mr Galwey said in his judgment.
Denis Cartledge took his neighbours to a NSW court in the hopes they’d be ordered to remove four trees from their property, which he claimed would damage his home if they fell
However Acting Commissioner of the NSW Land and Environment Court, David Galwey, found the trees had been poisoned by Mr Cartledge
‘That the pattern of dieback aligns with the presence and depth of drill holes seems more than coincidental – I find it most likely that poison has been applied to the trees, resulting in dieback and the presence of dead branches.’
When Mr Cartledge was asked about the presence of the drill holes, he told the court, in words to the effect of: ‘Holes appear in trees all the time.’
Mr Galwey later found, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Cartledge, or a person associated with him, caused dieback in the trees, resulting in the presence of dead branches near and above his property.
He was ordered to pay for any works needed to prevent the dead branches falling and the removal of any other hazardous branches.
Mr Galwey also found that the effects of the poison may not ‘yet have been fully realised’ with further tree decline to come.
Therefore, Mr Cartledge was also ordered to pay for the removal of any further deadwood after 12 months.
The court ordered both Mr Cartledge and Mr and Mrs Dhadlie to obtain, and provide to each other, a quote from an experienced tree contractor to remove dead branches from the three poisoned trees.
And if Mr Cartledge wishes to have the trees pruned, he must pay for the works.
Mr Cartledge provided no evidence suggesting any of the trees are likely to fall over
An example of a vertical drill hole which can be used to kill a tree stump (stock image)
Mr Cartledge must also provide Mr and Mrs Dhadlie with at least seven days’ notice of the works.
However, Mr Cartledge told the court he was unable to pay for the works due to his ‘financial circumstances.’
So he was granted discretionary orders that would allow him to only carry out the tree works if he could afford it.
‘I have found that Mr Cartledge’s actions led to the risk; and he now has the opportunity to mitigate the risk,’ Mr Galwey said.
Under NSW’s Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the illegal removal or destruction of trees carries a maximum criminal penalty of $1.1million, plus an additional fine of $10,000 for each day the offence continues.
The Daily Mail has contacted Mr Cartledge and Mr and Mrs Dhadlie for comment.