Here's a BBC article summarising events in the trial last week: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g3kxx1k6xo
For comparison, we had to fell a mature sycamore on our land last year; this now has more than a dozen shoots growing from its base, ranging between six and ten feet tall, all with lots of leaves on them.
You claimed the tree was “regrowing with vigour” - this is simply false at this point in time.
I cant believe they've gone Not Guilty.
The state will sacrifice them to their gods.
An example will be made and these men will be severely punished on a much harder scale that what is deserved.
Its only a tree after all. It wasn't even documented until that silly Robin Hood movie.
It was bringing a lot more joy and happiness to the world for a lot more people than these idiots. But yeah, extreme punishment isn't bringing it back, and all the folks knowing it was them wot done it is surely punishment in itself. A fine and community service would be plenty.
I don't think this is a well thought out argument.
If there is any difference, would it be related to the value of the object? Would you say a random tree in a backyard has the same "value" as an iconic tree whose destruction is causing widespread outrage?
Close to the midpoint you're walking up and down a bunch of small but steep hills and valleys, when a huge tree appears in the next valley.
It was really a memorable view in the mostly monotonous English countryside.
But it was also a thing of beauty that was deliberately mutilated for no reason. I think many people worry that this kind of casual destruction is becoming increasingly commonplace, and that valuing natural beauty is becoming harder to even comprehend in the coarsend popular culture of this little island.
Edit to add:
Over the last few years in the UK a great many ancient trees have been cut down to build HS2, as well as various roads. To the developers they were just an inconvenience: in the way, and not offering any opportunity for value extraction except as dead timber. They were probably also not as instagrammable as the tree in question.
Mostly the media coverage of this focussed on the human conflict, not the trees themselves. I wonder whether we're losing our ability to even talk about the dignity and intrinsic value of non-human things.
Are you sure you mean ancient and not veteran? Ancient trees usually have some rather special protections.
Until it got chopped down.
I had actually planned to walk to this tree simply because of how it looked, its location and how peculiar and lovely it seems, from a late night browse on google maps.
The tree was located about 30 miles from the northern border of England. It could possibly be described as on the middle by longitude but it's far from the middle of England as a whole.
No need to downvote me stickler!
I don’t normally say anything but thanks when corrected but in this case most foreigners would expect England to represent the GB landmass so in this case there’s no need to point out the error. Even if it was , it’s odd to start explaining the borders, it’s almost as if you are entirely confused by the prospect of the tree being in the center of the GB landmass. I’m sure you are not but that’s what it comes across as. Only saying this so you work on your context analysis in discussions.
I would say it is worth pointing out though, specifically because foreigners are most likely to be confused between England and GB. Hope you get your karma back :)
pavanto•9mo ago