National Trust sued

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

The total annual footfall for the whole of Hampstead heath (800acres) is in the region of 7 million visits.

 

Though it has to be said that it's a site with a significant number of eyes trained at BTI & PTI level keeping a looksee.

 

I can probably get the figures for all the significant tree/branch failures (I collate & hold these in the office) over the last year, across the whole site to compare & give some context as to of how often the we actualy have any reported near misses.

 

 

 

.

 

it would help put this guys mis judgment in statistics into reality.

 

well tinkered mod!

 

we HAVE to stop this kind of twaddle, im going to start putting some effort into this subject even if it means dropping the fungi ball for a while.

 

it needs a propper sorting this threats business:sneaky2:

[David Humphries]

For accurate figures regarding this, it's worthwhile considering getting in contact with the guys (John Watt I think) at Middlesex University where DARM sits

 

(Descision Annalysis & Risk Management)

 

They have extensive data on accidents & fatalities surrounding trees in the Uk over the last decade or so.

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

For accurate figures regarding this, it's worthwhile considering getting in contact with the guys (John Watt I think) at Middlesex University where DARM sits

 

(Descision Annalysis & Risk Management)

 

They have extensive data on accidents & fatalities surrounding trees in the Uk over the last decade or so.

 

 

.

 

thats good to know.

 

have you ever had an "incedent" on the heath?

[David Humphries]

thats good to know.

 

have you ever had an "incedent" on the heath?

 

No deaths

 

 

Few near misses, and an incident ten years ago when (during a very significant high wind event) a young girl became trapped under a fallen Willow.

 

Some injuries but not life threatening.

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

do you know how many mature trees are on the heath?

 

im thinking 7 million (probably conservative) visits per annum against number of trees.

[scotspine1]

I am normally impressed by your posts, but on this subject I think your talking utter nonsense.

 

this statement is demeaning and aggressive and not what I'd expect to see from a moderator.

 

Just because the person has an opinion contrary to you own it does not give you the right to attack him personally.

 

......and dont even think about deleting this post or I'll be taking this issue to a higher authority.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

this statement is demeaning and aggressive and not what I'd expect to see from a moderator.

 

Just because the person has an opinion contrary to you own it does not give you the right to attack him personally.

 

......and dont even think about deleting this post or I'll be taking this issue to a higher authority.

 

erm, the member posting that huck is talking about started slinging names, and IS spouting poor info

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

wheres mike ellison when you need him!

[Sam Thompson]

this statement is demeaning and aggressive and not what I'd expect to see from a moderator.

 

Just because the person has an opinion contrary to you own it does not give you the right to attack him personally.

 

......and dont even think about deleting this post or I'll be taking this issue to a higher authority.

 

Don't really see that as "attacking him personally" it's just saying he's talking rubbish (in SH's opinion).

 

Unless I am missing something I think you've taken that the wrong way

[skyhuck]

this statement is demeaning and aggressive and not what I'd expect to see from a moderator.

 

Just because the person has an opinion contrary to you own it does not give you the right to attack him personally.

 

......and dont even think about deleting this post or I'll be taking this issue to a higher authority.

 

Please explain to me how it is "aggressive" or "demeaning"?????????

 

I made it clear it was only my opinion

 

Moderator are allowed to hold opinions.