Hi Group,

Where I live there seems to be an obsession about
cutting down trees either by property developers
or by people who have big trees in their garden.
The local Oak trees and Pines have been suffering
a massacre. I am talking about big trees, many of
over 100 years old.
Once they have gone they have gone.

Some have TPO's on them but the fines or abuse
does not seem to stop the chainsaws or tree
sugeons. Reporting them to the local council
authorities seems to have little effect.

Is there a website around where I can post pics of
the destruction.
A sort of public shaming.
Perhaps publish the house addresses and plea for
people to write letters to the offenders.

I am sure it a widespread problem in many areas.
Alan (inUK)

"TQPL" wrote in message
...
Hi Group,

Where I live there seems to be an obsession about
cutting down trees either by property developers
or by people who have big trees in their garden.
The local Oak trees and Pines have been suffering
a massacre. I am talking about big trees, many of
over 100 years old.
Once they have gone they have gone.

Some have TPO's on them but the fines or abuse
does not seem to stop the chainsaws or tree
sugeons. Reporting them to the local council
authorities seems to have little effect.

Is there a website around where I can post pics of
the destruction.
A sort of public shaming.
Perhaps publish the house addresses and plea for
people to write letters to the offenders.

I am sure it a widespread problem in many areas.
Alan (inUK)


If there is no TPO, surely there are occasions where removal of large trees
can be justified.
Peter (UK).

"Peter Coddington" wrote in message
...

"TQPL" wrote in message
...
Hi Group,

Where I live there seems to be an obsession about
cutting down trees either by property developers
or by people who have big trees in their garden.
The local Oak trees and Pines have been suffering
a massacre. I am talking about big trees, many of
over 100 years old.
Once they have gone they have gone.

Some have TPO's on them but the fines or abuse
does not seem to stop the chainsaws or tree
sugeons. Reporting them to the local council
authorities seems to have little effect.

Is there a website around where I can post pics of
the destruction.
A sort of public shaming.
Perhaps publish the house addresses and plea for
people to write letters to the offenders.

I am sure it a widespread problem in many areas.
Alan (inUK)


If there is no TPO, surely there are occasions where removal of large
trees
can be justified.
As much as I love trees, sometimes they simply need to be removed. Like the
2 huge and very old whores chestnut trees planted no more than 30 feet apart
and only 40 feet from my little cottage some 60 odd years ago.
I had them taken down and planted a rowan in their place . It is nice to be
able to plant things underneath where they used to be as it is not longer in
deep shade, nor do I have to spend the summer pulling out litle concker
treelets where they sprouted. Had they been situated elsewhere on my land I
would have left them be. Turns out that one was potentially dangerous as it
had rotted right down the centre. When the tree surgeon cut with his chain
saw, a spray of dirty smelly water shot out all over him. A couple more
years and my big tree may well have come down and killed someone! There was
no external sign that this centre rot had occurred.
I *do* believe that wherever possible a more suitable tree should be planted
in its place .

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:05:57 +0100, "TQPL"
wrote:

Hi Group,

Where I live there seems to be an obsession about
cutting down trees either by property developers
or by people who have big trees in their garden.
The local Oak trees and Pines have been suffering
a massacre. I am talking about big trees, many of
over 100 years old.
Once they have gone they have gone.

Not sure there is a lot you can do, I have full sympathy with you and
hate to see trees abused inthis way. Sadly fines are just a pinprick
to a developer and there's always a cowboy operator who will take the
money and do what the developer wants. As others have said there are
many and varied valid reasons why a tree might have to go and they
should be respected. On the other hand it behoves all of us to do all
we can to ensure that TPOs are enforced to the full extent of the law.
For the future we can try to be sensible in the ways we use trees in
our increasingly developed environment so that someone in future
doesn't feel the need to remove them prematurely or to mutilate them.
That'll be 2p please ;~)
Rod

Weed my address to reply

http://website.lineone.net/~rodcraddock/index.html

snip to spare someone's blushes!
As much as I love trees, sometimes they simply need to be removed. Like the
2 huge and very old whores chestnut trees planted no more than 30 feet apart

boggle and ROFL Sometimes typos are soooo funny! Thanks for giving
me a good laugh. Was it the whores or the trees which were huge and
old?bg


--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
bed and breakfast near Ludlow: http://www.stonybrook-ludlow.co.uk
Reply To address is spam trap

In article , TQPL TQPLlab@awinthrop.
freeserve.co.uk writes
Hi Group,

Where I live there seems to be an obsession about
cutting down trees either by property developers
or by people who have big trees in their garden.
The local Oak trees and Pines have been suffering
a massacre. I am talking about big trees, many of
over 100 years old.
Once they have gone they have gone.

Some have TPO's on them but the fines or abuse
does not seem to stop the chainsaws or tree
sugeons. Reporting them to the local council
authorities seems to have little effect.

Is there a website around where I can post pics of
the destruction.
A sort of public shaming.
Perhaps publish the house addresses and plea for
people to write letters to the offenders.

I am sure it a widespread problem in many areas.
Alan (inUK)

Yes, I have just had a battle with the local council over a development
next to me, lots of conditions were put in place to ensure that the
protected trees weren't damaged during the development, a protective
fence was to be put up before any work started and no root or branch
work to take place without prior consent from the council, day one saw
the cutting back of the trees and a 10' deep foundation trench dug under
the upper canopy of the trees within about 6' of the trunks. I called
the council and they sent out an enforcement officer to see what was
going on, they reported to me that the developer was breaking the
conditions of the permission and he would be written to advising him as
such and that, it would seem, is about as far as they could go, "what
about the protective fence" I asked, "well if he puts up the fence he
cannot dig his trench can he?" they replied!!, we went on to explore the
pointlessness of conditions when they can be blatantly ignored but the
planning officer assured me they are still worth putting in, I remain
unconvinced.
--
David

In article , Rod rodcraddoc
writes
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:05:57 +0100, "TQPL"
wrote:


Not sure there is a lot you can do, I have full sympathy with you and
hate to see trees abused inthis way. Sadly fines are just a pinprick
to a developer and there's always a cowboy operator who will take the
money and do what the developer wants. As others have said there are
many and varied valid reasons why a tree might have to go and they
should be respected. On the other hand it behoves all of us to do all
we can to ensure that TPOs are enforced to the full extent of the law.
For the future we can try to be sensible in the ways we use trees in
our increasingly developed environment so that someone in future
doesn't feel the need to remove them prematurely or to mutilate them.
That'll be 2p please ;~)

It's because we have an increasingly developed environment that we need
to be so careful about the trees we have left. I was walking around the
neighbouring town last night and quite shocked by the absence of
birdlife compared with our relatively tiny garden - it seems a line of
decorative 'suitable' trees just doesn't do - you need a certain width
of vegetation to be able to attract more than the odd blackbird and
seagull.
--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"

"Sally Thompson" wrote in message
...

snip to spare someone's blushes!
As much as I love trees, sometimes they simply need to be removed. Like
the
2 huge and very old whores chestnut trees planted no more than 30 feet
apart

boggle and ROFL Sometimes typos are soooo funny! Thanks for giving
me a good laugh. Was it the whores or the trees which were huge and
old?bg

grin I always call them whores chestnuts lol.

On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 14:23:52 +0100, Kay
wrote:


It's because we have an increasingly developed environment that we need
to be so careful about the trees we have left. I was walking around the
neighbouring town last night and quite shocked by the absence of
birdlife compared with our relatively tiny garden - it seems a line of
decorative 'suitable' trees just doesn't do - you need a certain width
of vegetation to be able to attract more than the odd blackbird and
seagull.

Yes, I didn't enlarge but if I had I would have said that these trees
being butchered are probably very significant in the minds of the
locals and may be of some amenity value but in terms of the ecology of
the area they are probably not desperately important - what's needed
for that is large scale planting of native trees with a substantial
understory and areas of grasses and herbs. These need to be connected
by good 'corridors' of vegetation with other similar areas.Given the
aversion of Joe Public to rough vegetation and his/her fear of dense
woodland on the doorstep, this is going to be difficult to get past
local politicians and planners without a big education drive. You're
absolutely right, the kind of 'amenity' planting carried out by local
authorities (on behalf of voters and council tax payers) is all but
useless in terms of encouraging wildlife of any description. You have
to assume the voters are getting what they want, hence the need for
education. In the meantime the best hope is probably in our own hands
in our own gardens.It's not just local authorites though, last time my
wife and I went to Bodnant we were struck by the lack of birds
compared with our garden here. We can only speculate on the reasons,
pressure of visitors? or more likely the fact that beautiful though it
is there are practically no native plants there. They have started to
remedy this to some extent in some of the newer plantings so things
should be better in a few years.

Rod

Weed my email address to reply
http://website.lineone.net/~rodcraddock/index.html

The message
from (Sally Thompson) contains these words:


snip to spare someone's blushes!
As much as I love trees, sometimes they simply need to be removed.
Like the
2 huge and very old whores chestnut trees planted no more than 30
feet apart

boggle and ROFL Sometimes typos are soooo funny! Thanks for giving
me a good laugh. Was it the whores or the trees which were huge and
old?bg

Two whores with chests and nuts only thirty feet apart probably means
he's either in a red-light district or a bordello.

Janet.

In article , Rod rodcraddoc
writes

Yes, I didn't enlarge but if I had I would have said that these trees
being butchered are probably very significant in the minds of the
locals and may be of some amenity value but in terms of the ecology of
the area they are probably not desperately important - what's needed
for that is large scale planting of native trees with a substantial
understory and areas of grasses and herbs. These need to be connected
by good 'corridors' of vegetation with other similar areas.Given the
aversion of Joe Public to rough vegetation and his/her fear of dense
woodland on the doorstep, this is going to be difficult to get past
local politicians and planners without a big education drive.

We look after a 'nature park' - disused mill ponds and derelict ground
where buildings have been demolished, which over the years has been
planted with native species and is now showing the benefits - we even
have a kingfisher. We have full support of the Council (Leeds) who own
the land, but we have had strange comments along the way from the
brigade who feel it should all be short grass and well weeded flower
beds.

But equally we have people who look at the waste deep fools parsley and
say dreamily 'this is just how I remember it when I was a child'

We're having an Open Day in a couple of weeks, with various exhibitions,
pond dipping and so on, to help about all the hidden bits (seed heads,
invertebrates) that need to be in place to support the pretty birds and
butterflies that they appreciate ;-)

Last year's Open Day was a success, with the baby newts and the leeches
the undoubted stars of the show.

Some of our success is undoubtedly that we have a good 'wildlife
corridor' in the shape of the old railway line, which links us to the
woods around Esholt (aka Emmerdale).

And while I think of our 'back garden' types - we were at Tangy Mill in
Kintyre last week - a lovely setting with the banks of the stream
flanked by red campion, water avens, yellow flags, vetches, trefoil,
lady smock, to name just a few. I was saddened to see a comment in the
log book about how 'sad' it was not to be able to get right to the
stream, and how the banks should be mowed.


--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"

On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 20:37:52 +0100, Kay
wrote:

I was saddened to see a comment in the
log book about how 'sad' it was not to be able to get right to the
stream, and how the banks should be mowed.

Exactly what you're up against, it's a very widespread attitude I'm
afraid. Your own project is a lovely example of what can be achieved
where the will exists.

Rod

Weed my address to reply

http://website.lineone.net/~rodcraddock/index.html

Thanks Peter, Just, Sally, Rod and David for your
postings.
Appreciate the input.
With regards
Alan(inUK)

wrote:

Yes, I have just had a battle with the local council over a development
next to me, lots of conditions were put in place to ensure that the
protected trees weren't damaged during the development, a protective
fence was to be put up before any work started and no root or branch
work to take place without prior consent from the council, day one saw
the cutting back of the trees and a 10' deep foundation trench dug under
the upper canopy of the trees within about 6' of the trunks. I called
the council and they sent out an enforcement officer to see what was
going on, they reported to me that the developer was breaking the
conditions of the permission and he would be written to advising him as
such and that, it would seem, is about as far as they could go, "what
about the protective fence" I asked, "well if he puts up the fence he
cannot dig his trench can he?" they replied!!, we went on to explore the
pointlessness of conditions when they can be blatantly ignored but the
planning officer assured me they are still worth putting in, I remain
unconvinced.

Probably won't make a blind bit of difference, but could you write to
your council and suggest that the next time the developer in question
applies for planning permission, that they remember that he broke all
the conditions last time. If they continue to give said idiots planning
permission, perhaps the local paper might be interested at election time.