Where do you stand on Places for Everyone?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Sycamore Gap tree felled | Man in his 60s also arrested
- Thread starter pride in battle
- Start date
tbf it is relevant and this tree felling opens up that conversation up.
This is act of eco and cultural vandalism and uncessary destruction of a sight of beauty and historic importance, this wantant dispicable act should, be a catalyst for people to say no more destruction of our wetlands, our forests, pur lost rainforests or even one single tree, be it by a **** like this or a developer.
This government in particular is open to destrucrion of our wild areas and if this area in particular could be sold and built on historical signiflicance or not that tree would be felled in an instance to build on.
All I am saying is if you are angry about this be angry when the next historicaly and culturally important tree, marsh land or forest is being considered for development, like the one in Chorlton and many more we will lose
Sure, I might be, we both might be and we may discuss it then too. On a tree by tree basis perhaps.
Doesn't mean the anger now is misplaced, disproportionate, or insincere. Which is how I read or maybe misread your initial post.
Nothing wrong with that conversation btw, and it should be had. Just not as a distraction or implied justification (though inadvertent whataboutery) of this one being destroyed.
Saddleworth2
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 21,577
this thread does seem to lurch into unexpected areas.Sure, I might be, we both might be and we may discuss it then too. On a tree by tree basis perhaps.
Doesn't mean the anger now is misplaced, disproportionate, or insincere. Which is how I read or maybe misread your initial post.
Nothing wrong with that conversation btw, and it should be had. Just not as a distraction or implied justification (though inadvertent whataboutery) of this one being destroyed.
(ubiquitous puns on tree parts)
(mouth breathing, post covid litter louts)
urban genie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 32,467
The idea to protect the green belt of GM by developing brown field sites only.Where do you stand on Places for Everyone?
If it does that then it is a good thong, thpugh it shouldn't mean free rain over willfully knocking down historical and cultural landmarks and buildings at the sale time
At the minute in Gorton and next door in Openshaw any patches of grass or shrilubned are is being turned into housing estates, bar the parks and near me there are campaigns to save local commons and and greens battled prleriodically
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 17,376
- Team supported
- Manchester City
So a 60 yr is arrest. It was obviously not done by a 16yr old from the start. How anyone could think a 16yr old could have the skill set to do that I dont know.
Why it was done is anyone guess.
Why it was done is anyone guess.
It has a lot of allocations in the green belt (which will no longer be classified as greenbelt as a result) but seeks to enhance and protect the remaining green belt. However slightly less allocations than the original GMSF due to mayoral intervention (ignoring Stockport pulling out).The idea to protect the green belt of GM by developing brown field sites only.
If it does that then it is a good thong, thpugh it shouldn't mean free rain over willfully knocking down historical and cultural landmarks and buildings at the sale time
At the minute in Gorton and next door in Openshaw any patches of grass or shrilubned are is being turned into housing estates, bar the parks and near me there are campaigns to save local commons and and greens battled prleriodically
So a 60 yr is arrest. It was obviously not done by a 16yr old from the start. How anyone could think a 16yr old could have the skill set to do that I dont know.
Why it was done is anyone guess.
I'm sure it will slowly come out.
And no doubt polarise opinion and open up another front of the culture war we are so desperate to maintain.
urban genie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 32,467
So it is not adhereing to it's original proposed standard and cheating by reclassifying ares as not green belt, no suprise but then it is failing it's duties if it is doing thisIt has a lot of allocations in the green belt (which will no longer be classified as greenbelt as a result) but seeks to enhance and protect the remaining green belt. However slightly less allocations than the original GMSF due to mayoral intervention (ignoring Stockport pulling out).
Exeter Blue I am here
Well-Known Member
A perfect summation. I don't know why some are struggling to grasp such obvious stuff to be honest.Ok, if you are being genuine rather than flippant.
People are outraged because it is This tree.
It is part of a World Heritage property, protected by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 and also through the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas), which covers protection of the 'setting' amongst other things. It is not just a bit of odd vandalism, it is vandalism of a monument and listed property, and it is a crime.
Beyond that, the tree is iconic and a big part of shared cultural heritage. It appears in art, films, music videos, photography, painting, literature. It inspired people, lifted people's spirits, attracted and wowed visitors. It was cared for by some (employed to do so), and cared about by many.
It is a significant loss, to a place, to history, and to cultural references, and to some people's affection.
So no, it doesn't really compare to 100s of other trees, felled with permission (or not requiring permission) to make way for approved development decided by someone as being needed and appropriate.
There is a discussion there, of course, about the merits and deteiments of the removal of those trees too. But it is not really a discussion for this thread, or particularly relevant to this tree.
Aye and it is a terrible uncessary and as youp say cruel act and the **** who did it needs prosecuting
however hardly anyone all over social media decrying this have ever given this tree a thought or the others felled many times for no reason, cutting each one down is a cruel act of nature, most angry about this don't give a shit about trees or honestly this tree either.
What point are you making here, that people don't have the right to be angry, or that their anger is misplaced?