Tree Preservation in Quarry
From:
Julia Gasper
Date:
Apr 09 11:04 UTC
Short link
If Nigel had bothered to read my messages before he rubbished them, he would
find that on 27th March I wrote "I will be asking whether there is any strong
reason for
felling the tree, and unless it is diseased or dangerous, I will be objecting."
Again, on April 6th I wrote of the large number of trees that have been felled
in Quarry in the past year or so "None of these trees were diseased or
dangerous."
So I have already answered the question about whether they were healthy or not.
I did not use any such term as "in league" nor "sinister" or "underhand" ,
terms which are supplied by the strong imaginations of Nigel and Jock.
The Council's announcement about some planning applications being
"confidential" comes from the webpage relating to trees and felling. Is Jock
really expecting us to believe that the Council uses ttrees at secret addresses
for refuges? I can only assume you are joking, Jock.
1st of April's over, you know!
If any one has a serious explanation of why the Council should keep some
planning applications secret regardless of public accountability, then I am
still waiting to hear it.
The problem attitude, or "mentality", is the tree-hating attitude. Almost
every time a house is sold the first thing people do when they move in is to
cut down all the trees. I noticed this at the last address where I lived. On
one side the new occupants cut down some lovely apple trees behind the house,
and paved over the front garden for parking (despite living opposite a car
park) while on the other they cut down the small ornamental laburnum tree that
had such beautiful flowers in the Spring. The new owners just cleared all the
trees out automatically , regarding them as a form of clutter or "mess". That
is the attitude that we are up against. That and apathy.
.