Loading Notifications...

Assisting the Climbers trying to stop HS2

 JAMJAM 12 Jun 2020

Hello All,
I am writing on behalf of the amazing protestors who are trying to protect the ancient woodlands from being destroyed by HS2. These dedicated people are climbing trees and doing whatever they can to stop these ancient woodlands from being cut down.

I was wondering if anyone might be in a position to offer support in the way of donations of climbing equipment. If you can that is great they need all sorts, rope most importantly but anything else would be much appreciated. Or you could even go down for a day and help get some ropes up in the trees.

I look forward to your replies and please call me if you would like to find out more.

Best wishes
James

07448340380

Report
In reply to JAMJAM:

E0 

Report
In reply to JAMJAM:

I'm in favour of HS2 because it will reduce domestic flights and relieve capacity on the south WCML, so no, afraid not

Report
 Alpenglow 12 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

Would you tree hugging hippies rather have a 3rd runway at Heathrow instead?

Report
 marsbar 12 Jun 2020
In reply to Neil Williams:

I get what you are saying but I dont know why people can't just video conference.  

Report
In reply to marsbar:

Because Zoom is no substitute to hugging a member of your family, as those of us who have been apart from them as a while well know?

Report
In reply to Neil Williams:

It will also massively increase freight capacity on the rail network and reduce lorry movements, quieter roads and less emissions, double win!

Report
In reply to JAMJAM:

Sorry James, no spare time.
I'm too busy working through my list of statues.  Thank goodness for trains to get about.

Report
In reply to ebdon:

Indeed.  Even if there's a small decrease in commuting and business travel, that will still be the case.

And a good big infrastructure project is a good way to create jobs and value in an economy that will not be in a great way, and much better than roads for the environment.

Get it built.

Post edited at 16:55
Report
 marsbar 12 Jun 2020
In reply to Neil Williams:

For business. 

Report
 marsbar 12 Jun 2020
In reply to ebdon:

That I didn't know and is something that needs consideration. 

Report
In reply to ebdon:

HS2 is a dedicated passenger line, increase in fright is only likely if it frees up slots on the rest of the Network. Oh, you also need to break the road-haulage stranglehold. 

Report
In reply to JAMJAM:

Whatever the rights and wrongs of HS2, you are too late. The same occurred at Newbury. If you want to change infrastructure projects you need to intervene before they are being built.  Outside of the direct area affected I suspect most people support it, particularly given the state of the economy. 

Report
In reply to HighChilternRidge:

The increased freight will be on the old network where capacity will be freed up. it's my understanding this is one of the main benefits of hs2. Cant rember where I got that from though so could be wrong.

Report
 kevin stephens 12 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

the train has long gone.  This is just a tokenistic gesture which will only further increase the cost for taxpayers during a very difficult financial future and further delay the project.  You may have a good but too late arguments on the economics but there is no doubt that HS2 has an overall environmental benefit, in reducing traffic and vehicle fossil fuel emissions

Post edited at 17:38
Report
 Cobra_Head 12 Jun 2020
In reply to ebdon:

> It will also massively increase freight capacity on the rail network and reduce lorry movements, quieter roads and less emissions, double win!


Really?

Report
In reply to Cobra_Head:

Really!

Report
 McKEuan 12 Jun 2020
In reply to marsbar:

It's a weird thing to say but a video conference is no substitute for a face to face.

I'm in sales and when selling new products you can't do anything justice behind a camera or on a laptop. In these times I've looked at options but it's just better if you're face to face with customers, and more efficient.

If I could do my job from the comfort of a showroom awesome, but getting out and seeing people is the job!

Report
 webbo 12 Jun 2020
In reply to McKEuan:

I guess on video when they have had enough of your pitch, they can just turn you off. It’s bit harder to boot you out of the office.;)

Report
 Philb1950 12 Jun 2020
In reply to McKEuan:

What you say may be true for you, but throughout my career in civil engineering I frequently had to drive hundreds of miles for a 15 min. meeting that could quite easily have been done via Skype etc. It was usually down to a mainly office bound engineer wanting a day out or a “jolly”. I’ve even had to fly across Europe to deliver in person documents that could quite easily have been couriered. All a total waste of time and resources.

Report
In reply to ebdon:

I was agreeing! Not sure if people generally realise that space on the existing network is limited. 

Report
 McKEuan 12 Jun 2020
In reply to webbo:

Haha,this is true! 

Report
 McKEuan 12 Jun 2020
In reply to Philb1950:

100% agree with that, I too have traveled the distance for a fruitless meeting!

Swings and roundabouts. If everything could be done on video calls and on the phone nobody would need cars or travel as much so maybe that would be a plus! As you've probably found out there are times when travel is needed and times when you think "why did I leave the house today!"

Report
 Jenny C 12 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

I am against HS2, as others have said there are far cheaper and more effective ways to connect the North. I also agree that as we spiral into unprecedented debt thanks to Corvid19 such projects are financially unviable.

BUT the moment protestors started the dangerous practice of leaving nails on the public roads, to vandalise cars you lost my support. 

Post edited at 19:05
Report
 Offwidth 13 Jun 2020
In reply to ebdon:

Here we go again. HS2 is plain and simple an overpriced white elephant. At its original price tag the cost benefits were just about in its favour but now (even accounting for writing off much of the development costs) for the same price we could have two lower but still highish speed lines to London that together would have a bigger impact on freight capacity and passenger capacity. One would be roughly on the HS2 line but would be more flexible in the exact line and take half the land. There are various costed options on the second including the old Nottingham line. These alternatives could go to existing stations in midlands and northern city centers. High speed trains use way more energy for little concrete time gain (what's 30 minutes on the Birmingham trip given the connection problems and congestion variations at each end). High speed tracks need twice the amount of land each side and have less ability to curve around important sites.

What was really needed in the UK was investment in northern infrastructure (ports, rail and industry) so less freight needs to run the length of England

This support for HS2 in the face of any sensible cost benefit analysis looks almost like a cult.

Post edited at 10:42
Report
 Offwidth 13 Jun 2020
In reply to all

The cultists can dislike away but the cost of HS2 now being more than twice that of 2 standard highish speed lines is a straightforward fact. It's a fact that two standard lines would carry more passengers and free up more freight capacity. Everything with high speed comes with a higher price tag... twice the land, more than twice the energy,  more complex safety requirements, specific way more expensive rolling stock, larger costs when something goes wrong like the infamous leaves on the line. It's also stark how the public complaint about ancient woodland is regarded as much less serious than higher financial or political cost alternatives; I wonder what we will think of this in the future. A standard line could curve round ancient woodland more easily or worst case only lose half as much of it in the highly unlikely event this wasn't possible to some degree.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/high-speed-2-costs

Report
In reply to JAMJAM:

There is nothing more easily destroyed than the equilibrium of the fairest places.

Good on you, for trying to protect ancient woodland.

Best wishes. Your protests are needed and worthwhile. 

Report
In reply to Alpenglow:

> Would you tree hugging hippies rather have a 3rd runway at Heathrow instead?

What climber who loves the wild places, who appreciates the beauty of the landscape and the natural wild, who reveres the silence of the hills and crags could call out these folk and denounce them as mere tree huggers?

Is it not possible to see that HS2 maybe beneficial but so are the diminishing old woodlands? Some English hedgerows and woodlands have been in that place since the Bronze Age.

It may now be inevitable that HS2 will be built and some benefit may come from it but to quietly accept, without protest, the destruction of ancient woodland is wrong, misguided and sad. 

Report
 GrahamD 13 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

I think it about bloody time we started to drag our rail infrastructure up to the level many of our European neighbours have enjoyed for decades.  Bit of a national disgrace it's taken so long to get on with it.

Report
 Andy Johnson 13 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

It's disappointing to see all the downvotes you've had, and the negative tone of some posts here.

One thing that always aurprises me is how little sympathy there seems to be in UKC for landscape and habitat conservation. I'm thinking for instance of the discussion a while back of the effects of off-roading in the Lake District - where many people seemed to be unconcerned about the destruction of green lanes, and even participated. I'd always assumed that as climbers and users of the natural world we'd want to protect it. Apparently not.

This thing is going to destroy a lot of irreplaceable landscape and habitats. It saddens me. I'd personally rather they had been kept for our children rather than being collateral in some enormous last-century corporate welfare scheme.

Report
 BoaseF 13 Jun 2020
In reply to marsbar:

Hi,

I would imagine that very few people are video conferencing, most probably just going to work.

I would suggest that if trees were planted now on "retired" farmlands that in 200 years they would be the " ancient woodlands"

Report
 Andy Johnson 13 Jun 2020
In reply to BoaseF:

> I would suggest that if trees were planted now on "retired" farmlands that in 200 years they would be the " ancient woodlands"

If we can destroy actual ancient woodland to make way for industrial projects, why do you think these new trees would survive even a few decades?

But it's not just the trees. It's the habitat they're part of. How are all the interlocking natural systems and wildlife surposed to survive while these new trees grow?

Post edited at 13:46
Report
In reply to BoaseF:

> I would suggest that if trees were planted now on "retired" farmlands that in 200 years they would be the " ancient woodlands"

Yeah! F*CK nature. Nature's well sh*t .

Report
 JAMJAM 13 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

Wow,

I must say I'm really shocked and am sorry to have caused a heated debate. I guess I thought that  all people who loved to climb would put the outdoors/environment first! I am not going to get into the details of why and why not HS2. And I was only asking for people who might have some kit to please get in contact. And please do (but I guess only if you approve). I am sorry that a lot of you have a different opinions and I didn't want to upset anyone. 

Thanks for your comments and Happy Climbing.

Report
 timjones 13 Jun 2020
In reply to marsbar:

> For business. 

Video conferencing can work  with people that you meet face to face  regularly but can never entirely substitute for real life meetings IME.

Report
 Tom V 13 Jun 2020
In reply to timjones:

Within the confines of a smallish country I'd give that point some consideration but once it involves crossing oceans I'd be inclined to say we should settle for second best.

Report
 kevin stephens 13 Jun 2020
In reply to JAMJAM:

The point is you've missed the boat.  I'd be interested to know what you did earlier in the process to stop HS2 when it could have been stopped?  All you can achieve now is an expensive protest  that will achieve nothing.

Of course I and (I assume many others on this thread ) care deeply about the environment, including taking practical and effective measure to protect it.  Your tree protest will not fall into this category.

Report
In reply to JAMJAM:

A heated debate!

By the standards round here, this is barely a gazpacho.

Good luck with whatever it is you're doing and that.

BB

Report
 Alpenglow 13 Jun 2020
In reply to kevin stephens:

I think this hits the nail on the head here.

Most climbers are very supportive of the environment. Wouldn't your time better be spent protesting something that you can have a meaningful impact on, like something where the decision to go ahead hasn't been made yet?

There's nothing meaningful to be gained from climbing in some trees to protest against HS2. HS2 is going ahead and your actions will only be a blip of a roadblock. They will have negligible impact in the long term, costing the government extra money/time which will push up the price of HS2 leaving less money to spend on other infrastructure projects.

Looking at several other countries on the continent who have high speed trains running at 200mph, it puts our network to shame, running at 125mph (apart from HS1 at 140mph).

Report
 Cobra_Head 14 Jun 2020
In reply to ebdon:

> Really!

Last November, Chris MacRae, the Freight Transport Association’s Head of Rail Policy, said: “There is no mechanism in place to guarantee additional capacity released by HS2 is available for freight.”

Report