Rustling Road trees are being felled right now

[Robin-H]

Aargh I can't resist!

 

How is planting more a PR trick - surely it's a benefit long term!

 

The fact they are only doing so one one road out of the hundreds across Sheffield that are losing mature trees makes it seem like a PR attempt. As far as I am aware, Rustling Road is the only road in Sheffield where trees are being replaced on a more than one for one basis.

 

Rustling Road also happens to be the road that was at the centre of a very widespread and negative news campaign about Sheffield City Council and the arresting of pensioners, and was the subject of a petition that gained many thousands of signatures, thus was likely to be mentioned in many subsequent press reports.

 

If it isn't an attempt of gaining positive press why is Rustling Road the only road to benefit from replacement trees above a one to one ratio? It seems like a bit too much of a coincidence to me.

 

Sheffield City Council know that this is the road that will be the focus of press reports..

[Guest makapaka]

The fact they are only doing so one one road out of the hundreds across Sheffield that are losing mature trees makes it seem like a PR attempt. As far as I am aware, Rustling Road is the only road in Sheffield where trees are being replaced on a more than one for one basis.

 

Rustling Road also happens to be the road that was at the centre of a very widespread and negative news campaign about Sheffield City Council and the arresting of pensioners, and was the subject of a petition that gained many thousands of signatures, thus was likely to be mentioned in many subsequent press reports.

 

If it isn't an attempt of gaining positive press why is Rustling Road the only road to benefit from replacement trees above a one to one ratio? It seems like a bit too much of a coincidence to me.

 

Sheffield City Council know that this is the road that will be the focus of press reports..

 

Well maybe given the turmoil they caused they have over compensated in this instance but one for one is also good yeah?

[Robin-H]

Well maybe given the turmoil they caused they have over compensated in this instance but one for one is also good yeah?

 

It is of course better than nothing, but a sapling (or standard) won't make up for the loss of a mature tree for many many years. It would be less of a problem if the tree was the same or similar species to the original, but this is not the case in most cases, and they are replacing large canopied trees (the benefits of which have been discussed on here) with small more ornamental varieties, so even when the trees are fully grown they won't replace the benefits lost.

 

That of course is not the main gripe that people have however. If every tree that was being felled was replaced with a smaller variety there would not be the amount of uproar if every tree being felled actually needed to be felled.

 

It is the fact that thousands upon thousands of healthy mature trees are being unnecessarily felled and replaced with saplings that is the main issue.

[Cyclone]

Just been on Look North. Amey are replacing the trees on Rustling Rd today.

Apparently they are replacing 6 trees for every one removed

 

As Robin has already said, the only road they will be doing that on. A PR exercise.

[Robin-H]

As Robin has already said, the only road they will be doing that on. A PR exercise.

 

Indeed. And (in case this part was missed) it isn't six trees for every one, it's just over two - not sure where the six figure came from if that was quoted on Look North?

[Guest makapaka]

As Robin has already said, the only road they will be doing that on. A PR exercise.

 

Your argument for maintaining trees would have merit if they weren't being replaced- 6/1, 1/1 whatever.

 

Time moves on - we've got new roads, paths, lights and trees.

 

It's a no brainer.

 

Losing existing trees is sad but not a reason to denounce the whole scheme which is ultimately benefiting the city, arguably in the short term, definitely in the long term.

[Robin-H]

Your argument for maintaining trees would have merit if they weren't being replaced- 6/1, 1/1 whatever.

 

Time moves on - we've got new roads, paths, lights and trees.

 

It's a no brainer.

 

Losing existing trees is sad but not a reason to denounce the whole scheme which is ultimately benefiting the city, arguably in the short term, definitely in the long term.

 

I'm yet to see a coherent argument that convinces me what the short time (or indeed long term) benefits of this current plan are.

 

Trees that are dead, dangerous or diseased should be felled and replaced.

 

Trees that are causing significant damage that cannot be rectified should be felled and replaced. Members of STAG are not even suggesting that all the solutions highlighted in the Street's Ahead 5 Year Management Strategy are used, only those that would not cost the council any additional money.

 

Trees that are causing minimal damage, and which could easily be rectified should not be felled. Unfortunately this appears to be the majority of the many thousands of trees that Sheffield has lost, and is continuing to lose.

 

I'm really not sure what the benefit of that is, apart from financial benefit for AMEY.

[Guest makapaka]

I'm yet to see a coherent argument that convinces me what the short time (or indeed long term) benefits of this current plan are.

 

Trees that are dead, dangerous or diseased should be felled and replaced.

 

Trees that are causing significant damage that cannot be rectified should be felled and replaced. Members of STAG are not even suggesting that all the solutions highlighted in the Street's Ahead 5 Year Management Strategy are used, only those that would not cost the council any additional money.

 

Trees that are causing minimal damage, and which could easily be rectified should not be felled. Unfortunately this appears to be the majority of the many thousands of trees that Sheffield has lost, and is continuing to lose.

 

I'm really not sure what the benefit of that is, apart from financial benefit for AMEY.

 

It doesn't really matter though does it?

 

There will be a new tree, admittedly younger but eventually established?

 

It's sad but not the end of the world.

 

Rustling road wouldn't have existed unless someone tarmacced over a field?

[Robin-H]

It doesn't really matter though does it?

 

There will be a new tree, admittedly younger but eventually established?

 

It's sad but not the end of the world.

 

Rustling road wouldn't have existed unless someone tarmacced over a field?

 

I don't think anybody is suggesting this is the end of the world. People are raising legitimate concerns about the future of Sheffield's street trees, and the seeming reluctance of Sheffield City Council to take any measures to minimise the loss of what is a universally accepted beneficial element of urban street scenes.

 

I'm sorry but I really fail to see the logic in that argument (in bold).

 

The felling of healthy mature trees causing no or minimal damage that can be fixed without costing the council any money is justified because at one point Rustling Road would have been a field?

[Crosser]

It doesn't really matter though does it?

 

There will be a new tree, admittedly younger but eventually established?

 

It's sad but not the end of the world.

 

Rustling road wouldn't have existed unless someone tarmacced over a field?

 

I don't think it's sad, infact if they cut the tree outside my property down, I would buy them a chainsaw to do it, AND pay their wage for doing it!!!