The Chavs Posted February 11, 2008 Author Share Posted February 11, 2008 About fifty or more years ago there was a massive fire and many of the trees were destroyed. This resulted in the growth of the young sycamore trees that we have today, sycamore trees are the dandelions of the tree world. Since the fire it has become overgrown and a few years ago Dr. Rotherham suggested that the introduction of sheep would help prevent the common from becoming overgrown. Unfortunately there was an outcry from the dog walkers who would have to put their dogs on leads and so the scheme never got of the ground giving us the situation that exists today. I remember a fire in the 70's. Probably 76 when we had the heat wave (??). Im not sure if this is the massive fire you mentioned but it was quite exiting at the time. To me (a nipper at the time) it seemed the whole common was on fire and it was very exciting to watch the fire engines all over the estate at Loxley trying to get water/access to the common. In reality, it was probably a small fire, I recall it destroyed an area between the field from Long Lane end and the main path that now goes through the common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I remember a fire in the 70's. Probably 76 when we had the heat wave (??). Im not sure if this is the massive fire you mentioned but it was quite exiting at the time. To me (a nipper at the time) it seemed the whole common was on fire and it was very exciting to watch the fire engines all over the estate at Loxley trying to get water/access to the common. In reality, it was probably a small fire, I recall it destroyed an area between the field from Long Lane end and the main path that now goes through the common. Yes, that is the fire I meant, perhaps it wasn't as long ago as I thought but Malcolm Nunn said that was the reason for all the young trees that are now so proliferate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chavs Posted February 11, 2008 Author Share Posted February 11, 2008 I'm not suggesting that this is automatically right, but the information that I have seen is insufficiently detailed for me to make an informed decision whether it is 'disastrous for the common' or 'a sensible and prudent planning decision' or somewhere in between the two. The area is very large and whether the plan is something I would want to oppose is dependent on not just the number of trees, but also the pattern of felling, the species to be felled and the age of the trees to be felled. There are thousands of young trees that have self seeded all over the common. As the original poster this is probably sensible. I posted because the leaflet came through the door and initially I was shocked, especially as 2800 seems alot. Thinking about it since then, I agree we need more information. The leaflet is not "by anyone" so who sent it ?? Same here, hard to tell, but one thing I can say is that I don't trust that mob as far as I could throw um'. Agreed. If anything, the actions of this council (and various others, you know what I mean lol) makes me question things rather than just accepting that they are doing the right thing for the people of Sheffield. Everyone has the right to more information and to question decisions made. I will find out what I can. I have emailed Chris Grice, who dealt with the licence application and I will post when I get a reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beckelina Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 If the licence details are correct in the OP then the Council are asking for permission to fell 2800 trees over the next 104 years, which is on average about 27 trees a year. I have some limited knowledge of woodland management and to me this sounds appropriate for maintenance of mosaic heathland and woodland habitat, particularly if one of their objectives is to reduce mature sycamore control the spread of sycamore, which have little biodiversity value, and protect heathland, which is extremely rare, and a valuable habitat for lizards amongst other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chavs Posted February 11, 2008 Author Share Posted February 11, 2008 If the licence details are correct in the OP then the Council are asking for permission to fell 2800 trees over the next 104 years, which is on average about 27 trees a year. LOL. Good spot beck!!!! Is this a misprint on the leaflet (definately says 2112), perhaps it should be 2012. Ive asked the person who dealt with the application for more info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldershelf Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 As has been pointed out by others we need more information on this subject before any sensible conclusion can be arrived at. However because SCC are involved it must be treated with suspicion, are SCC interested in proper management of this area or cheap fuel? Or do they have a more ulterior motive? Will SCC make such a **** up of the land that its only fit for building on? Add your own conspiracy theory, with SCCs involvement anything could happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmyowls Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 As has been pointed out by others we need more information on this subject before any sensible conclusion can be arrived at. However because SCC are involved it must be treated with suspicion, are SCC interested in proper management of this area or cheap fuel? Or do they have a more ulterior motive? Will SCC make such a **** up of the land that its only fit for building on? Add your own conspiracy theory, with SCCs involvement anything could happen. Very well put! if our labour council are involved THERES always a ulterior motive ive learned in the past!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dozy Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 As the original poster this is probably sensible. I posted because the leaflet came through the door and initially I was shocked, especially as 2800 seems alot. Thinking about it since then, I agree we need more information. The leaflet is not "by anyone" so who sent it ?? Agreed. If anything, the actions of this council (and various others, you know what I mean lol) makes me question things rather than just accepting that they are doing the right thing for the people of Sheffield. Everyone has the right to more information and to question decisions made. I will find out what I can. I have emailed Chris Grice, who dealt with the licence application and I will post when I get a reply. My bold I quite agree! And it doesn't say much for SCC when we automatically start looking for ulterior motives when they propose something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depoix Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 is it just these two commons that are having trees chopped down? ive been in beeley woods today and there are several felling notices regarding cutting down of trees in the wood and up by deepcar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 As has been pointed out by others we need more information on this subject before any sensible conclusion can be arrived at. However because SCC are involved it must be treated with suspicion, are SCC interested in proper management of this area or cheap fuel? Or do they have a more ulterior motive? Will SCC make such a **** up of the land that its only fit for building on? Add your own conspiracy theory, with SCCs involvement anything could happen. I think it is Bradfield Council and they take a real pride in that side of town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.