Hmmm EA

[Lancs Lad]

Why are 7,000 people fighting to save 'royal' lime trees?

Thousands of residents are fighting to save the century-old lime trees in their part of Lancashire.

www.bbc.co.uk

@JD450A interested to know your thoughts ..

 

[JD450A]

Why are 7,000 people fighting to save 'royal' lime trees?

Thousands of residents are fighting to save the century-old lime trees in their part of Lancashire.

www.bbc.co.uk

@JD450A interested to know your thoughts ..

Rules for ye and not for me.

IF that was you or I there would be absolutely no question that the limes must be protected and loved, cherished and valued above human life.

But the EA are allowed to do s**t like this. They are very young limes.

 

[Lancs Lad]

Rules for ye and not for me.

IF that was you or I there would be absolutely no question that the limes must be protected and loved, cherished and valued above human life.

But the EA are allowed to do s**t like this. They are very young limes.

Yep and happily splurging tax payers money on flood defences. Local folks know that river very well. They ain't stupid.
Sometimes one wonders what drives some of this flood defence stuff...phantom water level rises ...? And the costs are eye watering once again done by the big boys on the gravy train.

 

[Monkeybusiness]

From an ecological point of view they are a pretty wanky easily replaced monoculture that don’t offer masses of habitat value.
From a street-scene point of view they definitely improve an otherwise ugly road, but they also partially block an expansive view across open countryside.
From a heritage point of view, they were planted as a celebration of a coronation, but I doubt any royal has ever seen them or is even aware of their presence.
From a flood-protection point of view they need to go.
From a common-sense point of view I’d imagine reinstating a routine dredging regime would probably preclude any of the works from being necessary….

 

[Lancs Lad]

From an ecological point of view they are a pretty wanky easily replaced monoculture that don’t offer masses of habitat value.
From a street-scene point of view they definitely improve an otherwise ugly road, but they also partially block an expansive view across open countryside.
From a heritage point of view, they were planted as a celebration of a coronation, but I doubt any royal has ever seen them or is even aware of their presence.
From a flood-protection point of view they need to go.
From a common-sense point of view I’d imagine reinstating a routine dredging regime would probably preclude any of the works from being necessary….

Yeah im no tree hugger...far from it
Think it's more the quango rolling in spending £54m raising the flood defences 300mm! Yep 300mm.

 

[JD450A]

Sometimes one wonders what drives some of this flood defence stuff...phantom water level rises ...?

Lidar guided computer modelling, driven by a spotty 20yr old university graduate with very little understanding of reality on the whole.

 

[doobin]

Lidar guided computer modelling, driven by a spotty 20yr old university graduate with very little understanding of reality on the whole.

Just been through this with a felling licence for 30-40 year old birch woodland. Picture taken in winter, looks brown cause of all the bracken. Marked down as ancient woodland

 

[Smiffy]

Just been through this with a felling licence for 30-40 year old birch woodland. Picture taken in winter, looks brown cause of all the bracken. Marked down as ancient woodland

There is no ancient woodland at all in England. Think there is a little in scotland and wales but England at best has semi natural ancient woodland. And even that is a bit of a cop out in the south east. Also I think woodland in Sussex should be Oaken-hazel, birch is a weed tree.
For anyone interested in woodland the
books by Oliver rackham are very good. And I think the EA should be made to read them as he puts them to shame.

 

[Storrsy]

There is no ancient woodland at all in England. Think there is a little in scotland and wales but England at best has semi natural ancient woodland. And even that is a bit of a cop out in the south east. Also I think woodland in Sussex should be Oaken-hazel, birch is a weed tree.
For anyone interested in woodland the
books by Oliver rackham are very good. And I think the EA should be made to read them as he puts them to shame.

What defines "ancient"?

 

[JD450A]

There is no ancient woodland at all in England.

A little incorrect.

There are pockets of ancient woodland. But not significant quantities.

Dartmoor and the spine of Cornwall has a fair amount.

 

[Lancs Lad]

A little incorrect.

There are pockets of ancient woodland. But not significant quantities.

Dartmoor and the spine of Cornwall has a fair amount.

Has to be consistent cover since 1600s or something?
Absolutely joke ..they'll dribble over a naff syc but happily fell acres of fields with decent old oaks near us for a load of "affordable" hutches.

 

[Smiffy]

Has to be consistent cover since 1600s or something?
Absolutely joke ..they'll dribble over a naff syc but happily fell acres of fields with decent old oaks near us for a load of "affordable" hutches.

Also has to have never been managed. Everything in England has in some way been meddled with.

 

[V8Druid]

Lidar guided computer modelling, driven by a spotty 20yr old university graduate with very little understanding of reality on the whole.

bang on there Rory
Had massive arguments with EA and their flood modelling for my old w/shop site in Aber. which had never flooded .. their LIDAR mapping had the site 3ft lower than it was in reality and I proved their TAN 15 mapping was grossly inaccurate for the whole area with up to date topo. spot heights, varying by as much as 4ft from theirs ... no apologies forthcoming, but they had to climb down and re-do their TAN 15 maps - their original mapping hugely devalued my site .. never trust a TAN15 flooding map, where ever you are - will almost be guaranteed to be drastically wrong