Jump to content


Council tree felling...

Recommended Posts

We've had some removed and replaced; generally the ones that were too big for where they were.

All looks good now. good job IMO

 

 

Hush your mouth. You're not allowed to say that a quiet majority of people who actually live in the areas affected don't conflate carefully managed tree management with 'evil culling'.

 

Be prepared to suffer the wrath of the bearded classes. And their husbands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hush your mouth. You're not allowed to say that a quiet majority of people who actually live in the areas affected don't conflate carefully managed tree management with 'evil culling'.

 

Be prepared to suffer the wrath of the bearded classes. And their husbands.

 

 

I must admit i thought long and hard before sharing my opinion.

I think I have covered my tracks well, but in any case I'll get the crash barriers and private security team on standby outside my house ready for rent-a-crowd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to agree, very little praise for as you say carefully managed tree maintenance, perhaps most people who think this way are just sitting on their hands ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere does it say "the council" in this quote. It's a statement of belief about what behaviour is okay and what not. But makapaka in your desire to defend the council, you've seized on what you thought was a mistake to distract from the behaviour of the council.

We all know that the police were there at the instigation of the council though.

 

Not at all.

 

I asked why the poster was intent on attacking the council and they responded to that post with the statement they were looping down trees and arresting people with pink trumpets.

 

I haven’t seized on anything - that’s just a fact it’s written above.

 

You accuse me of being one sided but it’s actually the other way - you and others can’t accept anything I say without accusing me of bias.

 

Now to the point where clarifying a simple statement that the council didn’t arrest anyone is now “distracting from the behaviour of the council”.

 

It’s just a desire to shut down any view which does not conform to your/others pre determined opinion. It demonstrates a much higher level of one-sidedness than I could ever be accused of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how we can have a bias towards your posts, they're literally always in defence of the council or amey, at least when that's the topic being discussed.

 

She didn't say that the council arrested them, but we all know that the police were there on the request of the council. As they were at the dawn raid on Rustlings Rd (not forgotten that one have you), where they (at the request of the council) misapplied old legislation to arrest a number of people who were subsequently released without charge (and the police were warned not to misuse that legislation as a pretext for arrests again).

 

You'll find me on other threads defending the council, that demonstrates a lack of one sidedness. Not on this thread though, on this thread the council are thoroughly and completely in the wrong. I've not yet seen you criticise the council though, on any issue, ever.

 

---------- Post added 14-09-2018 at 10:24 ----------

 

Hush your mouth. You're not allowed to say that a quiet majority of people who actually live in the areas affected don't conflate carefully managed tree management with 'evil culling'.

 

Be prepared to suffer the wrath of the bearded classes. And their husbands.

 

Ah, neat little quip there, ad hom attack on anyone arguing against you. How's your beard coming along, still hoping that it will start to grow when you get older? :hihi:

 

live in the area most affected and can't say I've seen any evidence of any trees being removed.

Was it 5000 tree's removed before they've 'paused', but you've not seen any evidence of it. Amazing. I can see the evidence of it on my street, there are tree's missing, quite a few of them. I do have to literally open my eyes to see it though and compare what I see now to what I remember seeing before!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Was it 5000 tree's removed before they've 'paused', but you've not seen any evidence of it. Amazing. I can see the evidence of it on my street, there are tree's missing, quite a few of them. I do have to literally open my eyes to see it though and compare what I see now to what I remember seeing before!

 

 

Ahh neat little ignore of the replace after the removal.

I can only speak for what i've seen, but certainly no fewer trees, and many that are more appropriately sized for their location.

All good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Elliott street tree survey which SCC commissioned in 2007 concluded that 74% of Sheffield's street trees were mature, and that approx 1000 needed felling, with another 750 needing to undergo extensive surveys, possibly leading to removal. SCC somehow converted that into: 75% of trees are reaching the end of their life; 6000 needed felling by 2017, and 17,500 (half of all street trees) need to have been felled within a further 20 years.

 

This is why the "bearded ladies" of STAG think SCC are unnecessarily cutting down trees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, the saplings. In about 20 - 30 years they'll be of a similar maturity to the trees that were needlessly removed. That's 20 - 30 years of cheaper maintenance for Amey isn't it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah yes, the saplings. In about 20 - 30 years they'll be of a similar maturity to the trees that were needlessly removed. That's 20 - 30 years of cheaper maintenance for Amey isn't it...

 

Good long term planning too, even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ahh neat little ignore of the replace after the removal.

I can only speak for what i've seen, but certainly no fewer trees, and many that are more appropriately sized for their location.

All good.

 

No sign of any of the replacement trees in my area. Just holes in the ground. And a few half hacked trees that they've left half cut down, presumably as monuments to their own stupidity, and as a reminder to residents?

 

---------- Post added 14-09-2018 at 10:52 ----------

 

Got to agree, very little praise for as you say carefully managed tree maintenance, perhaps most people who think this way are just sitting on their hands ?

 

I think everyone is in favour of carefully managed tree maintenance aren't they? Sadly the Amey approach is very, very far from that.

 

Hacking something down is much easier and cheaper that maintaining it.

 

---------- Post added 14-09-2018 at 10:54 ----------

 

Not at all.

 

I asked why the poster was intent on attacking the council and they responded to that post with the statement they were looping down trees and arresting people with pink trumpets.

 

I haven’t seized on anything - that’s just a fact it’s written above.

 

You accuse me of being one sided but it’s actually the other way - you and others can’t accept anything I say without accusing me of bias.

 

Now to the point where clarifying a simple statement that the council didn’t arrest anyone is now “distracting from the behaviour of the council”.

 

It’s just a desire to shut down any view which does not conform to your/others pre determined opinion. It demonstrates a much higher level of one-sidedness than I could ever be accused of.

 

I think people wouldn't accuse you of bias if there was any example, anywhere, of you doing anything but defend the council. On every single issue, no matter the thread or subject. That's quite strange really, isn't it?

 

---------- Post added 14-09-2018 at 10:58 ----------

 

Hush your mouth. You're not allowed to say that a quiet majority of people who actually live in the areas affected don't conflate carefully managed tree management with 'evil culling'.

 

Be prepared to suffer the wrath of the bearded classes. And their husbands.

 

Perhaps this 'quiet majority' could go out and rally in favour of Amey then against these 'bearded classes' who don't especially want to see healthy trees cut down for corporate profit?

 

I'd wager they probably won't as they'd rather sit on their sofa in front of the television.....and then complain after all the trees in their area have gone.

Edited by paula4sheff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No sign of any of the replacement trees in my area. Just holes in the ground. And a few half hacked trees that they've left half cut down, presumably as monuments to their own stupidity, and as a reminder to residents?

 

 

That's not good, do you think they haven't finished the work or are they leaving it like that?

 

 

 

I dont know how to do multiple quotes, but re the silent majority, we will never know without a referendum, or something like a local election..

I do know plenty of people who are embarrassed by the 'protestors' stopping people getting on with their jobs, increasing the costs of the necessary works, and continually saying trees are being removed, instead of being replaced.

Personally I can honestly say the street I live on and the surrounding streets are in a much better state now and much much better set for the future following the long overdue maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not good, do you think they haven't finished the work or are they leaving it like that?

 

 

 

I dont know how to do multiple quotes, but re the silent majority, we will never know without a referendum, or something like a local election..

I do know plenty of people who are embarrassed by the 'protestors' stopping people getting on with their jobs, increasing the costs of the necessary works, and continually saying trees are being removed, instead of being replaced.

Personally I can honestly say the street I live on and the surrounding streets are in a much better state now and much much better set for the future following the long overdue maintenance.

 

I've no idea what their plans are -but it's been like that for about a year now. The holes in the pavement are a 'no win, no fee' claim waiting to happen in my view.

 

I'm still baffled as to why anyone would be "embarrassed" by a group of people not wanting healthy trees destroyed to line the pockets of a multinational company.

 

These trees don't need to be 'replaced' (although, as mentioned, they're not being where I live) at all. They need to be properly maintained. They're not causing problems - as the independent survey showed. No one has ever disputed the removing of trees that the survey stated need replacing. That the survey was undertaken and then ignored is indefensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

X