Council unable to establish who poisoned trees at Gymea Bay

The poisoning of the mostly mature trees has provided enhanced views of North West Arm of the Hacking River.

A council investigation found a drill and poisonous liquid were used on all the trees at the rear of a house in Ellesmere Road along with some trees on three adjoining properties.

The council said the matter was reported to them in April by the owner of the property on which trees were poisoned.

The property owner also "has gone to some expense in trying to save the largest tree", the council said.

Most of the trees have since died and been removed for safety.

Cassandra Scott, who lives next door to the properties feels "disgust, anger and disbelief" at the environmental destruction.

"Those trees were part of the beautiful vista I look at every day, and I noticed they were slowly dying," she said.

Ms Scott and other residents wrote a detailed letter to the council, mayor and ward councillors on October 5 protesting at "the lack of enforcement activity".

They said they had been told that unless they could provide video evidence of the tree poisoning, the council was unable to prosecute.

Another concern of the residents was that there was no mechanism in this case for an order for replacement trees to be planted.

A council spokesman said an investigation was launched "after a complaint from the property owner in April this year".

"Since this initial complaint, it has further been established that a number of trees on adjoining properties had also been poisoned," the spokesman said.

"Despite the best efforts of council staff and extensive engagement with surrounding residents in seeking to identify a likely perpetrator, council has been unable to meet the standard of proof required to take further action."

The Sutherland Shire Council spokesman said the relevant state legislation required the council to prove a matter beyond reasonable doubt.

"This requires either an admission of guilt, or a witness that saw the person commit the offence and is willing to provide a statement and attend court if required," he said.

"Unfortunately, in this case, council was not able to establish who had undertaken the poisoning.

"It is not lawful for council to take compliance action based on assumption, or the balance of probabilities.

"Council has thoroughly investigated this matter and acted within the provisions provided under the NSW Legislation. The property owner has gone to some expense in trying to save the largest tree.

"Dead trees were lawfully removed on the affected properties, by the owners, as they became hazardous."

Ms Scott said she was "deeply disturbed at the council's interpretation of the legislation" covering the offence.

"It leaves residents such as myself in a state of distress because the threshold of evidence is unreasonably high.

"They expect us to have cameras on our homes pointing towards adjoining properties".