Jump to content

Stop the felling of the St Marks Elms


Amadeus
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'd imagine one or two MHKs will be watching this with extreme interest with an election looming and if the result that the Manx Gas protests obtained with a far lower public involvement are anything to go by, I'd suggest there may be a review of this decision shortly.

It's rare for the Manx public to mobilise to this degree over any issue and if @ 1/3rd of the population have indeed signed this petition it will be very difficult for our politicos to ignore it, certainly it will be at electoral peril for a couple of them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Trackman said:

I note that the Petition with a lot of support is to save the trees, though I am not sure what the exact purpose of today's demonstration is, but it highly likely that anyone at the demonstration has signed the petition. How will this work? The felling of the trees has been approved through a lawful process. The lawful process was arrived at through democratic means, ie approved by Tynwald, and operated by a Department of the Government. The process has been completed. For the petition (and possibly the demonstration) to be successful then the democratic process must give way to mob rule, or a form of anarchy and indeed bullying. The imperative for the protest now must surely to prevent any more of this or it will be government by the mass protest aided by our spineless politicians.

Well if I was the land owner I’d have chopped the trees down as soon as the kick off started, you have permission, why wait for a demonstration and the decision to be halted/appealed/reversed? That way the blame lays firmly with the the department who granted the decision in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I'd imagine one or two MHKs will be watching this with extreme interest with an election looming and if the result that the Manx Gas protests obtained with a far lower public involvement are anything to go by, I'd suggest there may be a review of this decision shortly.

It's rare for the Manx public to mobilise to this degree over any issue and if @ 1/3rd of the population have indeed signed this petition it will be very difficult for our politicos to ignore it, certainly it will be at electoral peril for a couple of them.

Thank you 2112 for the troll warning. Being surrounded by idiots is nothing new - duck's back and water spring to mind.

I would have thought that reviewing the decision is fraught with danger and will open a proper can of worms. It might even mean that applications are made to overturn previous decisions made. That is provided there is a way through the legislation that the decision can be reviewed. Is the Minister going to petition the Court to overturn a decision of his own committee? This will be fun to watch.

I am in no way into the eco-woke brigade but I love a bit of nature. Wouldn't it cause excitement at the general election if the Manx Green Party had two candidates in each constituency this year campaigning on the issues raised by the Elm tree kerfuffle? This would scare the hell out the of the sitting members and might well be a catalyst for change in how the countryside is treated. I can just see the sitting members spouting insincere platitudes as they are transfixed in the headlights. But hey, this is Manx politics we are talking about. Farm a granny will likely be order of the day.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minister Boot has just announced that he wants to look at other available options, that also serves the purpose of making him look good and Perkins look a twat. If Tynwald seats are perceived as being on the line, who knows what rabbits may be pulled from the hat?

There were a number of changes pushed through re. planning applications in the last 12 months or so of Mr Boot's tenure, some would say mainly aimed at making objection more difficult, like having to reside within 25 metres of the subject in question in order to object to any application? Perhaps this incident will shine the light onto the structure of planning matters and conditions and lead to a little more transparency and clarity.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

Well if I was the land owner I’d have chopped the trees down as soon as the kick off started, you have permission, why wait for a demonstration and the decision to be halted/appealed/reversed? That way the blame lays firmly with the the department who granted the decision in the first place.

The Mad Maxeman should have come out, chopped down the trees in the dead of night. A proper arborist in reality would do the job as any mistakes run the risk of the ‘lobby’ groups and possible criminal offences. 
 

In reality with all this negative publicity, which will relate to the trees issue, will spill over to the possible potential redevelopment of farming land, for possible residential use. I’m sure the planning applications will scoured more diligently in future, and I’m sure the planning committee will be more on the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Annoymouse said:

Well if I was the land owner I’d have chopped the trees down as soon as the kick off started, you have permission, why wait for a demonstration and the decision to be halted/appealed/reversed? That way the blame lays firmly with the the department who granted the decision in the first place.

It's bizarre that they haven't too be fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trackman said:

Wouldn't it cause excitement at the general election if the Manx Green Party had two candidates in each constituency this year campaigning on the issues raised by the Elm tree kerfuffle?

Cos there's no bigger issues facing the island than chopping down a few trees? 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 2112 said:

The Mad Maxeman should have come out, chopped down the trees in the dead of night. A proper arborist in reality would do the job as any mistakes run the risk of the ‘lobby’ groups and possible criminal offences. 

Even if you didn’t cut them down, if you took a chainsaw to them in enough places it would be enough to make them unsafe and felling (by a professional) would be the only option.

As much as I like the trees it does make a mockery of the whole planning process, someone within DEFA has visited the site, saw the mature elm trees, saw the plans and approved for them to be removed, but the anger seems to be directed towards the land owner rather than those who are paid by the public to preserve/protect wildlife and nature.

The petition whilst impressive is equally shocking, many more businesses here on island that contribute to the destruction of wildlife/nature on a daily basis and yet no one bats an eye lid.

‘Triggered’ is the word I think people use these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Planning applications are amazingly easy to push through at present, while you cannot object to anything that is further away than next door to you, and notices are only posted at the site. Partially hidden notices make even more of a mockery of the system.

Add to this the obvious capabilities (?) of those looking after the system.

Some MHKs need to look very carefully at their positions in advance of the next election.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, finlo said:

Would the Stabit lorry's even take that route?

Stabits were made off the Old Castletown Road near Meary Veg, but could well have been the route used to transport the stone used from Stoney Mountain quarry 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SleepyJoe said:

Could you possibly list the many more businesses here on island that contribute to the destruction of wildlife/nature on a daily basis?

Absolutely not, I don’t have deep enough pockets to withstand any libel/slander claims, I know you’ll argue that if it’s the truth I don’t need to worry but that’s not how it works.

I can say for example that lots of building waste isn’t processed or sorted correctly, lots of scrap vehicles aren’t depolluted properly (particularly air con gas that should be recovered and isn’t), quite a few spray shops that have inadequate filtration and simply vent to atmosphere.

We have nowhere to dispose of coolant, it just goes down the drain. We have petrol stations that don’t have the correct drainage, any fuel spilt simple washes down the drain whereas it should be separated.

Fuel/oil spills are fairly common place on the roads, a road sweeper will wash the road and then just deposits the contaminated water down a drain, sort of defeats the object.

Plenty more businesses that operate like they did in the 50s/60s and deny health and safety exists.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, finlo said:

Would the Stabit lorry's even take that route?

 

22 hours ago, TheTeapot said:

Weren;t they made at Port Soderick?

 

22 hours ago, finlo said:

Foxdale I thought?

The stone for the concrete mix came from Stony Mountain Quarry. The stabits were made at Port Soderick. I can’t remember the haul route. But it’d be logical to get them to the casting site that way.

Im sure the upgrading of the A26  and resurface well after 1980/81.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

It seems very strange that the felling of only two trees was agreed by the planning committee? Obviously the highways people have the power to override decisions made by that body? 

Not sure where you get two trees from. Trees come in various categories, A, B, C and U.

Officer report states:

2.3 There are two Cat A trees within the rows of trees on each side of the road, neither of which is being removed as part of the proposal. In total on the north western side of the road the proposal will involve the removal of 14 trees (7 Cat B and 7 Cat C) and on the south eastern side of the road, the removal of 11 trees ( 9 Cat C and 2 Cat U). The previous scheme would have resulted in the removal of 52 trees.

The two good trees are being retained. The ones with more limited life are being removed and many more planted. In 10-20 years, or a big storm, most Cat B&C will be dead or fall. Or have to be felled due to disease/deterioration. It’ll be like Ballaglass all over again. Trees, like field or hedge elm have limited life. They need felling and to be replaced from time to time.

Here are standard planning criteria for trees. It’s long established.

 

AFCB74AD-8C9E-4466-87C1-869285801E3C.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...