taxman Posted October 3, 2015 Share Posted October 3, 2015 Trees should not be cut down unless absolutely necessary. End of. I do not believe that the trees being cut down by Amay need to be cut down. I think they lie and the council are complicit in their lies. I will believe this until the qualified tree surgeon who looked at all the trees publishes his or hers assessment of all the trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-xsf Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 It isn't illegal to protest. I want to know what is happening to our trees once they are cut down? Are Amey selling them for timber or firewood? If so is this money being passed on to SCC? The trees belong to all of us, they are not an asset (or liability) for Amey to dispose of as they see fit. I'm sure the STAG would support any residents from Handsworth (or anywhere else) if they were concerned about tree felling in their area. You really have to be stupid to think that replacing a sapling with a mature tree is like for like. Saplings can support a fraction of wildlife, will hold much less rainwater and have millions fewer leaves to improve air quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the fonz Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 You really have to be stupid to think that replacing a sapling with a mature tree is like for like. Saplings can support a fraction of wildlife, will hold much less rainwater and have millions fewer leaves to improve air quality. Where do you think these trees come from? No one things its like for like as many have stated on here, that's impossible, but tree do grow. The pollution point is an interesting one but 2 things to consider, a tree improves the air quality the most in the growth period, many of these trees aren't still growing as they have reached full size. So if we assume many of these trees have been full size for some time, and within the next few decades will start to reduce the amount of pollution they absorb, over that period the sapling (then full size tree) will improve air quality more than the existing tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-xsf Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 The pollution point is an interesting one but 2 things to consider, a tree improves the air quality the most in the growth period, many of these trees aren't still growing as they have reached full size. So if we assume many of these trees have been full size for some time, and within the next few decades will start to reduce the amount of pollution they absorb, over that period the sapling (then full size tree) will improve air quality more than the existing tree. Well, I'm no scientist, however the volume of carbon dioxide consumed by a tree and the corresponding amount of oxygen produced by a tree are intrinsically linked to the volume of foliage. You're right in as much as the rate is higher for saplings (per leaf, if you like) but evidently a 100 year old tree has more leaves than a sapling. If SCC had been managing street trees responsibly over the years trees would have been replaced on an ongoing basis. Amey seem hell bent on removing trees wholesale now, simply as it is cheaper and less hassle for them, rather than pruning and caring for the healthy trees we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Well, I'm no scientist, however the volume of carbon dioxide consumed by a tree and the corresponding amount of oxygen produced by a tree are intrinsically linked to the volume of foliage. You're right in as much as the rate is higher for saplings (per leaf, if you like) but evidently a 100 year old tree has more leaves than a sapling. If SCC had been managing street trees responsibly over the years trees would have been replaced on an ongoing basis. Amey seem hell bent on removing trees wholesale now, simply as it is cheaper and less hassle for them, rather than pruning and caring for the healthy trees we have. It is regularly quoted on here that Amey are aiming to do things as cheaply as possible, and that it is cheaper for them to chop down trees than it is to maintain them. Does anyone know for a fact that this is the case? Are the terms of Amey's contract in the public domain? Do they get paid £X to chop down and replace a tree and £Y to leave an existing tree in place and maintain it, or £Z to what they want? Does anyone actually KNOW? If Amey maximize their profit by chopping down as many trees as possible, then why are they only planning to remove 12 (or 11 as I've also seen mentioned) trees from Rustlings road? Why not all of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Well, I'm no scientist, however the volume of carbon dioxide consumed by a tree and the corresponding amount of oxygen produced by a tree are intrinsically linked to the volume of foliage. You're right in as much as the rate is higher for saplings (per leaf, if you like) but evidently a 100 year old tree has more leaves than a sapling. If SCC had been managing street trees responsibly over the years trees would have been replaced on an ongoing basis. Amey seem hell bent on removing trees wholesale now, simply as it is cheaper and less hassle for them, rather than pruning and caring for the healthy trees we have. It wouldn't surprise me if Amey's main reason for cutting down trees is because there's lots of money to make out of it for little outlay. Nice little earner if you can get it … a few crossed palms, funny handshakes, that sort of stuff. Why all the sudden tree felling anyway, shouldn't it be ongoing? Are there any proper tree surgeons in Sheffield who've been asked to tender for this work I wonder … what do they think about all this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-xsf Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Amey have a contract to maintain the streets. I imagine they get a fixed amount per year. To fell a tree you only need a chump with a saw. To care for a tree properly Amey would need to employ a qualified tree surgeon which would cost them a lot more. Not all the trees on RUSTLINGS would need the same level of care so the ones which are younger, require less pruning or which are causing less damage to the pavements (supposedly) Amey will leave. The older trees, which are worth chopping down and selling and which would otherwise cost Amey more to look after, get felled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Amey have a contract to maintain the streets. I imagine they get a fixed amount per year. To fell a tree you only need a chump with a saw. To care for a tree properly Amey would need to employ a qualified tree surgeon which would cost them a lot more. Not all the trees on RUSTLINGS would need the same level of care so the ones which are younger, require less pruning or which are causing less damage to the pavements (supposedly) Amey will leave. The older trees, which are worth chopping down and selling and which would otherwise cost Amey more to look after, get felled. Re BIB. That explains it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindfulness Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 (edited) Trees should not be cut down unless absolutely necessary. End of. I do not believe that the trees being cut down by Amay need to be cut down. I think they lie and the council are complicit in their lies. I will believe this until the qualified tree surgeon who looked at all the trees publishes his or hers assessment of all the trees. I agree with you ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 15:37 ---------- It isn't illegal to protest. I want to know what is happening to our trees once they are cut down? Are Amey selling them for timber or firewood? If so is this money being passed on to SCC? The trees belong to all of us, they are not an asset (or liability) for Amey to dispose of as they see fit Hi there. Yes, it would be very interesting to see where exactly all the two thousand trees felled already have got to, wouldn't it? You really have to be stupid to think that replacing a sapling with a mature tree is like for like. Saplings can support a fraction of wildlife, will hold much less rainwater and have millions fewer leaves to improve air quality It would appear so. To compare a sapling with a century old tree is a very ignorant comparison. They are not like for like, even a child can see this fact. ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 15:40 ---------- Amey seem hell bent on removing trees wholesale now, simply as it is cheaper and less hassle for them, rather than pruning and caring for the healthy trees we have Which is against current best practice guidance and recommendations for the management of Green Infrastructure. SCC need to bring a legal action against Amey, demonstrating unprofessional practice. We have provided them with more than enough evidence to do so. ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 15:49 ---------- If Amey maximize their profit by chopping down as many trees as possible, then why are they only planning to remove 12 (or 11 as I've also seen mentioned) trees from Rustlings road? Why not all of them? It is 11 Trees on Rustlings Road, not 12. The RR petition was started, based on the incorrect information provided by Streets Ahead, to residents. Another example, from a very long list, of Amey's considerable incompetence. The PFI contract with SCC is for 25 years. We suspect that the plan is to fell pretty much ALL of Sheffield's mature Street Tree stock in that time. 11 trees planned now and the rest on RR at some convenient point in the future. ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 15:52 ---------- Why all the sudden tree felling anyway, shouldn't it be ongoing? The UK Forestry Standard advises sustainable management of the Urban Forest, of which street trees are a signifcant component. Felling up to 75% of Sheffield's street tree resource in a 5yr blitz, simply amounts to negligence, in my opinion. Edited October 5, 2015 by Mindfulness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 All those people on this thread who believe everything the council and Amey tell them should read this thread. Blatant lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts