Rustling Road trees are being felled right now

[Robin-H]

It is misleading is in the context of an ongoing campaign though isn't there?

 

Ie if a group seeking to campaign against unwarranted tree removal puts a ribbon round a tree it would suggest they are seeking to prevent it.

 

Youre now saying that people are putting ribbons around trees that they potentially accept should be removed.

 

You're [sic] inability to acknowledge any flaw in the argument is what's undermining a worthwhile campaign.

 

No - the purpose of the ribbon is to highlight which trees are going to be removed. It is really as simple as that.

 

You are assuming that a yellow ribbon means that that there is a consensus that that tree should be saved. (Incidentally some people think a yellow ribbon means the council have placed it there to tell the tree surgeons which trees to fell.)

 

Now, that's not an illogical assumption, but it is an assumption none-the-less and it has never been a stated aim of STAG to ribbon trees they think warrant saving, but to ribbon all trees marked for removal. Just because your assumption is wrong it doesn't mean that there is a flaw in my argument.

 

As I have now repeatedly stated members of STAG do not have, and should not be expected to have, a consensus as to which trees warrant removal and which warrant protection. I'm not sure how I can make that point any clearer.

[Olive]

No - the purpose of the ribbon is to highlight which trees are going to be removed. It is really as simple as that.

 

You are assuming that a yellow ribbon means that that there is a consensus that that tree should be saved. (Incidentally some people think a yellow ribbon means the council have placed it there to tell the tree surgeons which trees to fell.)

 

Now, that's not an illogical assumption, but it is an assumption none-the-less and it has never been a stated aim of STAG to ribbon trees they think warrant saving, but to ribbon all trees marked for removal. Just because your assumption is wrong it doesn't mean that there is a flaw in my argument.

 

As I have now repeatedly stated members of STAG do not have, and should not be expected to have, a consensus as to which trees warrant removal and which warrant protection. I'm not sure how I can make that point any clearer.

 

Now you explain this, I can see your logic, but I have to admit that I'd also assumed that a yellow ribbon signals "save this tree".

[Robin-H]

Now you explain this, I can see your logic, but I have to admit that I'd also assumed that a yellow ribbon signals "save this tree".

 

Indeed - like I said it is not an illogical assumption.

 

However, it would not be feasible for only the trees deemed worth saving to be ribboned. As I've said, there isn't a consensus as to which trees these would be, and so no individual ribboner could make the judgement call as to ribbon any particular tree or not. Somebody else might have a differing opinion for a start.

 

As it happens the vast majority of trees with ribbons are ones that in the multitude of opinions of STAG and others should indeed be retained. Only a small proportion of trees highlighted for felling should be felled, so it most cases a ribbon does imply what you assumed it to mean - however this is by no means applicable in 100% of cases.

[Olive]

Indeed - like I said it is not an illogical assumption.

 

However, it would not be feasible for only the trees deemed worth saving to be ribboned. As I've said, there isn't a consensus as to which trees these would be, and so no individual ribboner could make the judgement call as to ribbon any particular tree or not. Somebody else might have a differing opinion for a start.

 

As it happens the vast majority of trees with ribbons are ones that in the multitude of opinions of STAG and others should indeed be retained. Only a small proportion of trees highlighted for felling should be felled, so it most cases a ribbon does imply what you assumed it to mean - however this is by no means applicable in 100% of cases.

 

Hmm, it's a difficult one. Not much different you can do, but it does unfortunately mix up the message.

[Eater Sundae]

Whilst in the beginning there might have been some reasonably well thought through arguments on both sides of this debate, it appears for the large part both sides have now gone to the extremes.

 

STAG for their part seem to have put a tag/ribbon/flyer on every tree in the south of Sheffield - my favourite being the one on Sheldon Road which is pretty much at a 45 degree angle into the road, regardless of whether they're dangerous/diseased.

 

On the other side we've now got people advocating the removal of all trees.

 

I can only comment on area I live in (Carter Knowle) - Amey have done a good job on the roads and pavements, a few trees have been taken out but I don't feel like the area has been denuded of greenery.

 

Re bib. In my area (Nether Green) I'm pleased with the job Amey have done. Some replacement trees are in the same place as the ones removed, and some are in different positions, which are an improvement over the original position.

[Crosser]

Just to remove any lingering doubt, you're a massive troll and don't believe this in the slightest, right?

 

Actually that is EXACTLY how I feel regarding roadside trees

[Cyclone]

How strange that you live in one of the greenest areas of Sheffield then. One would think that you'd be more at home in an industrial park or perhaps a factory.

[Crosser]

How strange that you live in one of the greenest areas of Sheffield then. One would think that you'd be more at home in an industrial park or perhaps a factory.

 

Like I said earlier in the thread, I love trees if they are in places where trees should be.

 

If I wanted to spend my springtime cleaning up leaf litter, I would join the "keep Britain tidy" lot, but I don't.

 

If I wanted to clean bird-muck from cars every day I'd be a car washer.

 

and

 

If I wanted to spend fortunes mending damage caused to paths/drives etc I'd become a groundworks contractor.

 

 

The way "street trees" impact on my life have absolutely NO positives, so I'm just saying it how I see it.

 

If that makes me a "nutter" (as someone else said earlier in the thread) then that's their opinion, likewise I'm just stating mine.

[Cyclone]

You're demonstrably wrong about "no positives" as Robin has already proven.

 

But okay, I guess you're entitled to your opinion.

[Crosser]

You're demonstrably wrong about "no positives" as Robin has already proven.

 

But okay, I guess you're entitled to your opinion.

 

Proven?

 

How has anything been proven?

 

Just because some internet site says so?

 

or because more people don't have the problems I have with those trees than I do?

 

I'm just stating my opinion based on my experience with said trees.

 

Maybe people who like trees more have a different view, that's what life experience is all about.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Crosser