UKC

I've just watched a documentary on YouTube titled the wars of the british tree people. It documents the Newbury bypass road protest during the 1980's. It shows climbers being used to evict the protesters from tree houses. Does anybody remember this happening? It seems a strange thing for a climber to be involved in. It's well worth a watch. It left me feeling angry that I didn't do more to help the protesters at the time. It's a shocking indictment to Thatchers Britain .

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Yeah to be honest if I had been old enough I would have done more as well.


Would probably have started by building a fire around the base of the tree,maybe some punji sticks in the landing zone.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

I was working rope access at the time and the boss of the company I was with turned the work down - dumb shit!! I never did get that TVR!!!

E

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

remember it well.

In reply to Enty: I have worked with access lads from Sheffield who were involved on both sides and the bad blood lasted for years.
Rumours abounded about certain famous sheffield climbers going down in Porsche sort of summed up the hypocrasy of it all.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:
>
It seems a strange thing for a climber to be involved in. It's well worth a watch. It left me feeling angry that I didn't do more to help the protesters at the time. It's a shocking indictment to Thatchers Britain .

Good point. Because we are, after all, a homogenous mass who all feel exactly the same
about everything.
Oh and it was mid 90s not 80s and Thatcher had been out of power for a number of grey underpanted years.

In reply to muppetfilter:


I'm not sure if it shows hipocrisy, if somebody likes driving a Porsche it doesn't mean they want all the countryside covered in roads.

Granted it's not a very green car to drive though.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395: It was the 90's not the 80's. Unless I was at a different protest all together.
It was mostly good-natured, except when it came to evictions. I can see why there would be bad blood between the two sides.
I don't know if we changed much. Hopefully made it harder to put a road through a SSSI, perhaps some of the planning law changes since then reflect public opinion? I'd like to think so.

In reply to fijibaby: It was mid-90s. I was working in the Highways Agency press office at the time (as a skivvy, not a mouthpiece). There was some iffy behaviour on both sides from what I could make out.

In reply to Timmd:

Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395: Whatever happened to Swampy? He had his 15 minutes, appeared on nevermind the buzzcocks and seemed to disappear.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Presumably you walk your way around the country to get to climbing venues to avoid the hypocrisy of benefiting from roads and railways built through areas of natural beauty?

In reply to Steve Humm 4395: I was a security guard for a while when the batheaston bypass was being built. some surreal nights there.

Remember that Swampy bloke that lived in the tunnels to try and stop roads being built?

He's dead now had a heart attack.

He could have been saved but he flat out refused a bypass.

In reply to Timmd: It's actually a lot greener than a lot of people think, when you factor in the way it's built - actually greener than a Prius on that basis.

And at an average of 25 mpg, and co2 of 269 g/km, there are a lot of older 'climbers estates' that are far less green.

That just made me feel 10 years older when you said '80s!! A relief to remember it was just 1990s.

I was there for a while, I seem to remember we took a load of ropes and gear down, gathered from N.Wales climbers.

To be honest I didn't like the attitude on either side, whilst there were some lovely well intentioned people protesting there were also a lot of angry folk who didn't really give a f**k about the environment but just wanted a chance to fight against the establishment and then go to the Jobcentre in Newbury and sign on every two weeks to get paid by said establishment, and then complain that it wasn't paying them enough!

Hypocrisy there was lots of, the famous Porsche being just a part of it.

In reply to torquil: Why does a climber driving a Porsche make him a hypocrite - should all climbers drive a Prius to prove they're not planet killers?

In reply to Goucho:

im a climber, I love the planet, I love nature with little singing birds bouncing bunny rabbits, BUT I also like my 350bhp 2.5ltr turbo Focus ST which does about 15-20 mpg and shit loads of CO2. And its noisy too.

but I dont smoke and turn the lights off in my house when they are not needed so its ok

Dave

In reply to Postmanpat:

good point well made.

In reply to Enty:

You didn't want that work mate. Evictions tended to be quite "dirty" in nature.

I lived right next to (ie garden got chopped by a few feet) the bypass and much as there was good on both sides, there was a LOT of uncool stuff being done in both camps.

I do miss rickety bridge though!

In reply to Dave 88:

Ooh, I've just started thinking about Davina. Time to slope off to bed I think.

In reply to cuppatea:

Like++++!!!

In reply to Dave 88:
>

Not the ones I know about.

Worker - "look mate we're going to take you down anyway. Come easily and I'll bung you thirty quid"

Tree hugger - "ok"

E

In reply to Goucho:

This also has me confused.

E

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Dammed badly handled. Should have just brought in the Dragoons and cleared the lot of 'em. What? Bloody tree hugging vegie lefties don't like a bit of cold steel. They'd have shown their hides in a jiffy. What?

I had a friends go and protest at Newbury. One used to drive from Wales, on her own, to protest against the by-pass on a monday, then drive back again on her own, on a Friday. I asked her at the time why she was protesting when she was the only person in our HMO with a car and why she had to go in the car and not on a train. Apparently the trains were " not as convenient!"

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

I was there, i spent 3 very arduous months battling with climbers in the tree tops. I can assure you that not only were a substantial number of experienced rock climbers involved in removing us from the trees, but also a good number turned up to help us. This resulted in very intense battles at height (up to 100ft)between experienced rock climbers, some who allegedly were climbing partners.The climbing community were split, and apparently those doing the evictions were "blacklisted", i heard some were banned from "practice faces"?? There was even one case of a climber switching sides from helping the protesters to becoming one of those doing the evictions, they were earning £300 per day. At times the battle was brutal, we used fixed lines (12mm polyprop) to move between trees, one for feet, one for hands, normally attaching a cows tail to the lines. However many, including myself, opted to not be clipped on during evictions as movement was much quicker. Those doing the evictions on occasion cut the bottom rope (the foot one) with people standing on it, this happened to me at about 80 ft off the ground. I was also battered by a climber using a large figure of 8 as a knuckle duster during a battle on a platform.

It was brutal.

In reply to Enty: What you mean because you could have a BMW 5 series that does the same MPG as a prius but with the fun and without the horrendous batteries?

In reply to Enty:

There were a lot of very brutal evictions, some of which i was involved in. Newbury was nasty.

In reply to Dave 88:
>> I do miss rickety bridge though!>


Video of Rickety Bridge eviction, footage from around 21:55 to 22:03 involves me.
vimeo.com/12235148

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

You will get a chance to protest when Thatcher dies and if they give here (a very undeserved) state funeral.

In reply to Trangia:

And what corporate,fatcat,lying; cheating;tax dodging frausters don't like is getting locked up in prison. We should send in the dragoons to the boardrooms all over the country cleared the lot of 'em and lock them up. (Works both ways)

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

I remember car loads of Sheffield climbers driving to Newbury to protest about roads. I'm pretty sure they hadn't tried lobbying their MP first.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:


Nothing of the sort - its just a reflection on the fact that Newbury really, really needed a bypass which ended up costing all of us more than it should have done because of a load of muppets.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Got a surprising number of politically right leaning posters on here.

Shocking IMO

In reply to Skip:

I'm not particularly right leaning - I just knew how totally crap the A34 was for a supposedly major trunk road.

In reply to Skip:

If I have the correct understanding of Left and Right politics, not so surprising as most climbers are in the not so poor bracket.

In reply to Skip:

Why is a shock? You discovered first hand years ago that there were plenty of climbers who weren't exactly politically aligned to you.

In reply to MHutch:

True

In reply to MHutch:

I'm amused by the self important statements eminating from Sheffield through the likes of OTE that the climbing community was being split.

All the climbers I knew just got on with their climbing.

In reply to GrahamD:

This was the word on the ground at the time, however i wasn't a rock climber at the time (only properly started this year) so can't confirm one way or the other.

In reply to Skip:


When something really shocking happens - what do you do?

E

I went down a few times, on the protest side (drove a minibus once, got a lift or hitched). I wasn't driven by a massive anti-road fervour, but had some sympathy with it, and as is often in life, situations just lead to things happening. (I imagine the Beerkellar putsch was the result of too much lager and nothing to do the next day.)

I was involved in one scuffle with police, and a policeman made a grab for me. He caught the hood of my coat, a popper-removable one, and it came away in his hand. He looked a bit sheepish, gave it back to me and said Sorry. I said Thank you and he walked off.

Was interesting to be there, but my committment to it all fell far short of the rhetoric you heard around the camp fires.

It did put envronmental concerns into the wider debate all the same, I reckon.

In reply to Skip: Why, do you have to be a left wing, lentil munching ecco warrior to be a climber in your eyes?

In reply to Goucho:

You don't. I guess i presumed that climbers generally have a love of unspoilt natural areas and therefore may be opposed to the destruction of 100's of acres of fantastic countryside. Of course one can still be a nature lover and politically right leaning.

In reply to Niall Grimes: And it was quite good run running around in the trees

In reply to GrahamD:

You hide it well.

In reply to Skip: I think you're right that lots of climbers have a love of unspoilt natural areas. However, they also like sitting on their fat arses in their octavias to get to those places and bypasses make that easier.

In reply to Graeme Alderson:

It was great fun running around in the trees, building tree houses, building walkways, running logistics, manning the CB, and generally surviving in very basic conditions in a cold winter.

In reply to The New NickB:

Thankyou

In reply to cuppatea:

So there's no truth in the rumour that he has become respectable and moved into investment banking?

In reply to Skip:

Trashing the trees in other words.

If they hadn't been bulldozed you would have killed em yourself.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Thats the nub of it - most of the countryside wouldn't be available to weekend warriors if it wasn't for the motorway system - I doubt I'd ever get to Scotland without it.

In reply to Skip:

What the OP appears to have assumed that because climbers will tend to appreciate beautiful countryside they will therefore be "fundamentalist environmentalists" ie.that they believe protection of the environment always and everywhere trumps other considerations.

Clearly we aren't because we are heavy users of road transport to indulge our hobby.

Like anybody else we simply make a judgement on the relative economic and social benefits of a project compared to the environmental costs. With respect to the Newbury bypass many thought the economic and social benefits outweighed the costs, as I would think, did the M1 and M4. There is no contradiction with being a climber or a countryside lover.

Of course in reality most climbers going to Newbury probably simply weighed up their desire for a bit of random protest against their need to earn some cash

In reply to davidbeynon:

Takes alot more than tying ropes to trees to kill them,even a few nails here and there are no problem to mature oaks.

In reply to davidbeynon: Buidling tree houses in trees kilss the trees. Really?

In reply to Steve Humm 4395: just watching the you tube video, that's me being punched on 17:02

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

a few images from a friend of mine.

http://www.justinleighton.com/blog/photography-photos-pictures/newbury-by-p...

In reply to Jim C:I saw some grafitti in Preston,"coming soon-Thatcher Death Party,"can't wait.bw

In reply to GrahamD:


Just to add a bit of context, yes newbury was in dire need of the bypass and yes, a lot of protestors did nothing more than delay the inevitable and cost a lot of tax money.

However, there were many instances where the protestors were able to force simple changes to the overall plan which should've been taken into consideration from the very start. A prime example being the so called "Great Oak" by the Stockcross junction, was slated for felling to make way for the slip road. After a brief dig in, it was agreed that the slip road could simply be moved 20ft to save an oak tree that had been there for hundreds of years. There were many of these scenarios that are all too easily overlooked in favour of tarring everyone with the same time wasting hippy brush.

In reply to Skip:

Skip, were you up the great oak or the woods just north of that at all? I might have met you.

In reply to Bob Windsor:

Well I personally shall toast the old lady when she dies. And I am not even a Tory. Well......... I'm a great fan of Blair so perhaps I am.

In reply to Dave 88:

I was originally based in Penn Wood, southern end of the route(i think, memory is shot) on a camp called Seaside, one of the smaller camps. When we were evicted i stayed in a mates truck and was involved in the first 2 days of the Rickety Bridge eviction, "cherry pickered" down on day 2 covered in blood from being hit with a large Clog figure of 8. That was it for evictions on the advice/restraint of friends.

In reply to Skip:

No your memory isn't as bad as you think! That is in the south.

It's a shame there's so much bad blood over the whole thing. As I said above to Graham, there were some examples of things getting resolved relatively peacefully and everyone coming away having achieved something worthwhile.

In reply to Dave 88:

It would be interesting to know whether effort spent lobbying at the planning stage might have been more effective ? or maybe its hard to motivate that scale of action that early on in the process.

In reply to GrahamD:

Un-doubtedly. I was just trying to provide a bit of balance on the side of the protestors that although on the whole, things should have been done differently, there was some good (albeit not carried out in the best way), that came from it.

In reply to Skip: It would be fantastic to know how much you have done since in the area of tree planting and conservation ?

In reply to Dave 88:


Good post. At the time I was very much in support of the protesters and for many years avoided the by-pass on principle. However with the passing of the years I can see the need for such a by-pass. The principle protest at the time, as I remember it, wasn't so much anti-by-pass as anti- ploughing through ancient woodland. Really we need protests in this country over some matters. Not necessarily to stop something out right but to make people stop and think about what they are doing. Change is inevitable but in the process of change we need to think about what we stand to lose in the process.

In reply to muppetfilter:

Do I detect a note of sarcasm there?
Of course the argument doesn't necessarily follow. I have protested about many things over the years but don't feel the need to give my life to them.

In reply to Skip:

Why do you appear so proud of being on the end of violence? Very strange, borderline imature view of it surely!? (akin to a scally showing off his latest black eye "I'm well 'ard")

I appreciate standing up for something you believe in and having the stones to see it through but you seem particularly proud of these moments? I don't understand that?

In reply to Dave 88:

No doubt a very great many good intentions and few minor positive outcomes.

In reply to Duncan Bourne:

What we actually need is to get organised to protest early enough to avoid these confrontational situations which are only going to achieve minor success once it gets to that stage.

In reply to GrahamD:
I agree there. It is better for things not to get to the big clash stage. Alas intransigence and/or misunderstanding on both sides of things means that sometimes such clashes are inevitable.

In reply to GrahamD:

Yep, un-fortunately very true.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Was around 1994-1996, dependent on when you consider it started/finished.

In reply to Duncan Bourne:

It was unfortunate that the protest got billed as "No Newbury Bypass" rather than "Preserve Ancient Woodlands (and still have a bypass)". It might have got more general public sympathy if it did !

Unfortunately for the well meaning protesters, once it becomes a rallying call for the "smash the system" fringe the real message (no matter how worthy) just gets lost and the movement is in danger of becoming a another crusty protest parody.

In reply to Trangia:

I was at Newbury, and at an eviction of 2 there.

Lots to add, but let me just say 'Swampy' (hasn't been known as this since Newbury) is still very much alive, happy, living somewhere quiet, still very eco-minded, and is actually a really accomplished runner!

In reply to GrahamD:

That was done as well, the direct action started as the planning process was flawed, loaded in the favour of big business.

In reply to muppetfilter:

Why would it? So you can point and scream that's he's a hypocrite if he hasn't done any?

In reply to JayPee630:

FYI everyone...

http://www.eco-action.org/dod/no6/newbury_description.htm

http://www.eco-action.org/dod/no6/newbury_critique.htm

http://www.eco-action.org/dod/no7/1-4.html

In reply to JayPee630:

"We want to be a real threat to the malignant cancer of corporate capitalism, rather than a media freak-show or irritating market risk."

Gosh, and there we were thinking their priority was protecting the environment.......

In reply to Postmanpat:

Could be they see corperate capitalism as being a threat to the environment?

Infinate growth and limited resources don't go together so well, unless our economic/production models change so everything possible is recycled and used again.

I'd agree it's not a good way of expressing that they want to protect it though.

In reply to Timmd:

Its a bloody stupid way if you want to get the support of people who maybe depend on big business for their well being but never-the-less would like to protet ancient woodland.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Weirdly, a few people I know got into climbing through going to anti-roads protest camps. You get used to the heights and harnesses and have fun prusiking up to the walkways half-cut. Then your mates drag you off to try something "harder than climbing trees but more interesting" in Stanage and you're hooked.

Some of the climbers that came to defend the trees against the bailiffs also got into environmentalism in a bigger way when they saw the beautiful places that were being trashed in order to save motorists 2 minutes on their journeys.

Funny how the world works sometimes.

In reply to JayPee630: It just stands to reason that if someone has a vested concern about the loss of habitat and species that they could direct energies and time to doing something constructive. If as the tread proclaims these were people "fighting a war" then surely the energy time and resources could be better soent improving biodiversity and habitat elsewhere...

Or did they want to listen to the Levellers, smoke soapbar and drink cider and have a jolly good antiestablishment time before they moved on and got proper jobs in the mainstream of society ...

In reply to Noelle:


Quite often, the Climbers and the Motorists are one and the same person ! I suspect that most climbers didn't change their driving habits as a result.

In reply to Trangia:

Apparently he's living with his burd and three kids in a yurt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swampy

I don't regard having 3 children as being particularly environmentally responsible.

In reply to muppetfilter:

Personally i have planted somewhere in the region of 30,000 trees, done a great deal of hedge laying and plenty of other conservation related work.

In reply to Skip:

Interesting video. A bit too middle class (as a participator and spectator) and probably doesn't help 'the cause' too much from that perspective.

The person above who thinks the bypass saved 2 minutes obviously hasn't been through Newbury before it was built.

In reply to Skip: Bloody hell! 30,000 trees? That's 5 trees a day, each and every day with no day off for 16 years. You must be knackered!

In reply to Oceanrower:

Or 1000 a day for 30 days while working as a forestry contractor in S.Wales. Believe it or not, 1000 a day is not that difficult. They were not all commercial pine, we did a lot of indigenous broad leaf as well.

In reply to Skip: You can personally plant 1 1/2 trees a minute? Really?

In reply to Oceanrower:

Under the right conditions yes. Forestry planting involves just healing them in, make a slit with spade twisting one end to make a hole, flick tree routes in, stamp ground down, two strides, repeat. I was the slowest in the team, others were doing 1200/1300 a day. Seems mad, but is possible.

In reply to Skip: Well, you live and learn...

In reply to Goucho:

The funny thing is I dont think in those days mpg etc was the point or indeed anything like the issue it was today, it wasn't what I was refering to anyway.

The feeling at the time (iirc) was that climbers working for the bailifs were selling out and happy to take the work trying to pull other climbers out of the trees just because the pay was so good, with no care for the consequences. At the time the Porsche just seemed like a flaunted symbol of that imbalance.

Hope that makes more sense, and you're right hypocrisy is the wrong word, maybe the common human failing of selfish greed describes it better. Then again I'd want to get payed well to have buckets of s**t dumped on my head whilst hanging on a rope.

Please no more Levellers, please...

In reply to torquil: Nobody was palying The Levellers at Rickety Bridge, it was all banging techno first thing in the morning - generally when the Sheriff of Berkshire was reading the legal warning.

It all felt a bit Robin Hood Prince of Thieves when the Picts turned up under the orders of the Sheriff of Nottingham. Except there was thankfully no Kevin Costner!

In reply to Oceanrower:

Kind of depends on the size of the tree. I personally have planted 50 trees a day

In reply to Graeme Alderson:
Rickety Bridge eviction had a fantastic atmosphere about it. The soundsystem in the trees!!!

In reply to Duncan Bourne: I think I can assume they're very small trees.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395: Regardless of the arguments already stated in this thread, the fact is we need to plant more trees for future generations and the wealth of fauna that depend on trees. 500 years ago it is estimated that 75% of the UK was covered in native forest. Almost all of it was then cut down for ship building and the fields ploughed, only to be replaced by green cancer monoculture (i.e. perenial rye grass). I planted two English Walnuts last year in Staveley and have 24 baby apples, 2 sweet chestnuts, half a dozen yews and a bunch of other trees in my nursery to plant in the next couple of years. Go on people, do something altruistic for the next generation and their kids. It's not difficult - and it might just make you happy!

The Baron

In reply to Oceanrower:
Small enough to fit around 200 in your planting bag.

In reply to Duncan Bourne: well off topic, but if it's just slit planting whips, 1000/day is a base line. There's a world of difference between pot grown specimen/ garden centre trees and little 1u1 whips.

I knew a lot of ex-protestors - quite a few volunteered for me over the years. Some went on to mainstream (if there is such a thing) conservation jobs, most didn't

In reply to toad: Quick little known fact: the reason why you see so many lone oak trees planted in fields is a relic of the timber ship building industry. Timber build ships require almost no straight timber and such trees were prized for their curved boughs!

The Baron

In reply to Baron Weasel: I'll see your tree facts and raise you black poplars which also have a curved habit to their branches which was useful for timber ships and cruck houses

In reply to Baron Weasel: Thanks for that. There's a lone oak tree in a field near my mum's I wondered about for years!

In reply to muppetfilter:

"It just stands to reason that if someone has a vested concern about the loss of habitat and species that they could direct energies and time to doing something constructive. If as the tread proclaims these were people "fighting a war" then surely the energy time and resources could be better spent improving biodiversity and habitat elsewhere..."

Err... you make quite big assumptions there that you know exactly what the thousands of people involved in this kind of action do with the rest of their lives don't you think?

Or maybe aren't you interested in complex reality, and would just rather make Daily Mail style stereotypical judgements on people you don't know.

In reply to Oceanrower:

No you don't.

E

In reply to Removed User:

Probably more ecologically sound than living in a house, having a car and a normal lifestyle and having none, but feel free to judge everyone if it makes you feel better.

But this kind of thing was never about individual choices but about systemic change.

In reply to Baron Weasel:
Also they often mark old field boundaries

In reply to Duncan Bourne: Is there a Godwins Law equivalent for the first person to mention Oliver Rackham in an internet tree discussion?

In reply to Skip:

This could well be one of my all time favourite come-backs. Nice one.


The Battle of Rickety Bridge film was really interesting. Somewhere I still have a one of those stripy tops - I used to call it my "Swampy Top".

In reply to toad: From wiki

'A widely selected species chosen by golf architects in the 1960's it soon became apparent that the Poplar's very invasive roots destroyed land drainage systems, decades later the same courses were removing Poplars stands wholesale. At around 40 to 50 years this short lived variety starts shedding branches and are very liable to be blown over in high winds, each successive tree lost exposing neighbouring trees creating a domino effect.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populus_nigra

I got my info from John Seymors book 'The Woodlander'

The Baron

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Wow, this thread takes me back.
I found myself on a protest site near Neath in south Wales. It was on an area of SSI that was to become an open cast mine. It was a total accident finding the site, I was no Eco warrior, just drifting around in a van. Anyway soon became embroiled in the passions of the locals who, understandably we're not too keen to have their hillside ripped open. In fact I remember some of the old deep cast miners Being very proactive on the site. However there was also anger towards the protesters from younger locals anticipating employment in the mine. A drink at the local social club was not

In reply to Ybot Htulk:

Straight forward

In reply to Skip:

When I did tree planting for a day I had to jump onto the spade with both feet for some of them because of what the ground was like, it was fun even though it was tiring. Nice to think some of them could grow to become big trees. Was replanting broadleaf species where there had been coniffers, at Grenoside Woods near Sheffield.

In reply to Jim C:

Anyone who serves their country in such a role as she did, for the length of time that she did, deserves a state funeral. Just because you disagree with her politics it is stupid, snide, and rather childish, to attempt to deny her that.


In reply to Skip:

People have differing political opinions. Some, like myself, have no defined party alliance but make their minds up on individual issues as they present themselves. Life is more complex than left vs. right. You have time, you will grow into understanding life’s complexity. Life is full of interesting lessons, embrace them.

In reply to GrahamD:

You sir, have nailed it!

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:
I once met an Ent in some deciduous woodland on the South Downs.

In reply to stroppygob:

I have no party alliance either, and agree that it ain't that simple. I am older than you think.

In reply to birdie num num:

Oh dear - wasn't me.

E

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

I think Newbury woke a lot of people up. Sure there was a lot of dubious politics involved in the protest but a lot of the public seemed genuinely shocked that an ancient woodland didn't seem to have any significant intrinsic public worth. This meant a tunnel was a hillarious joke and even cheap sensible adjustments were ignored in the initial plans. I think future 'Newburys' became a little bit harder for the state to consider.

The reality of the UK road network is that most changes are piecemeal and when you remove one congestion point, it just creates another. When road planners start taking systems engineering more seriously I'll start believing them when they say a bypass is needed at a particular cost.

On Thatchers britain: who seriously thinks it stopped when she was given the boot? Its obviously still alive and kicking: the bankers thinking about how to avoid resigning at this very moment are part of it. When the 'one nation' tories were forced on the back foot, a narrow ideological political postion ended up in power that seemed to me to actively celebrate individual greed above social responsibility and state adjustment above any consequencies for the people. The conservative party is still trying to readjust to this day: look at all the early words of our PM about a new caring conservatism and then reality check with policy (this in a coalition with liberals) and what much of his party think behind his back.

In reply to stroppygob:
'Anyone who serves their country in such a role as she did, for the length of time that she did, deserves a state funeral. Just because you disagree with her politics it is stupid, snide, and rather childish, to attempt to deny her that'.

You can't be that naive? Anyone who attains that level of authority, regardless of their politics, is motivated by an intense personal drive for power, the belief that there is one way (and that is their way) and the desire to impose it onto others. Service to country has nothing to do with it.

In reply to torquil:


A feeling at the time, maybe - and one promoted strongly by a partisan climbing press. Most people were pretty ambivalent.

In reply to Flinticus:

Well said. By stroppygob's token ANY head of ANY state would deserve a State funeral.

In reply to tspoon1981:

I actually filmed an i/v with Swampy at the time and he showed me round the tree works, quite impressive, they'd constructed it so that if the police sawed off a particular branch, others with people sat on them would fall and be injured. He seemed a quite articulate young man for a 'swampthing'.
Wasn't Ben Moon involved in one of these tree protests for a while?

In reply to Offwidth:



Well I believe the ideology was to promotoe entrpreneurial behaviour and the 'greed is good' mentality is a consequence of that. I would question whether there was any particular evidence for greater social responsibility prior to the Thatcher era as well - industry had been brought to the point of being a basket case by greed from the opposite direction - from the shop floor. Basically people took what they could before Thatcher and they are talking what they can post Thatcher.

All of which is a total red herring as far as Newbury is concerned.

In reply to GrahamD:

"Basically people took what they could before Thatcher and they are talking what they can post Thatcher." Boy is your glass half empty. I'm sticking with greed is bad and some faith in humanity.

Its not a red herring firstly because the OP mentioned it and hence it got discusssed on the thread and secondly I think 'the state knows best despite what anyone else thinks' followed very directly from Margaret as she knew that her party majority was good enough to force things through against the will of a large majority of the population. Whatever you think of her, anyone around at the time knows that she only ever had the support of a minority of the population.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Excellent thread, could we leave the discussion of Thatcher alone though it risks ruining it!

In reply to Al Evans:

Ben Moon was involved in some of the evictions at Newbury, on the protesters side, very impressive to watch.

In reply to Bobling:

Agree.

In reply to Offwidth:

The point bing that human nature didn't somehow change fundamentally in the UK sometine during the 80s.

In reply to Timmd:

I agree too and am ignoring Graham's post and I apologise for the sidetrack.

In reply to Offwidth:Tis only the interent, no apologies needed. ()

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:
I hope that looking back a few years down the line £200 still seems worth it.

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Rickety Bridge doco an interesting watch. I loved the chap who comes out with "As you can see they are now tightening these handcuffs *really* tightly!".

In reply to Flinticus:

Utter bollocks, I'm afraid. Don't judge everybody by your own prejudices. I'm not claiming Thatcher was any kind of an angel, but she did serve her country as PM for many years, made some painful changes that were needed, and deserves a state funeral when she passes.

In reply to stroppygob:
In that case does Blair?

In reply to Darron: Yes. But only if we can bury him at the same time as Maggie.

In reply to Darron:

Much as I despise him, yes.

In reply to stroppygob:

When Thatcher dies the plan is that everyone in Scotland will be issued with a shovel so we can dig a hole deep enough that she can be delivered straight to Hell.

How did we get onto this subject anyway?

In reply to Removed User:

Please, please can you take some of these posters on a visit to some bars up there to express their theories? As for the question.. the OP started it.

In reply to Removed User:

It's about trees and protests I thought, this thread?

In reply to Timmd:
i reckon newbury and twyford down protests have done a lot to mitigate the expansion of roadbuilding
for a written account of the Newbury protests, 'the battle for the trees' by merrick is recommended (haven't read it though):
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Battle-Trees-Merrick/dp/0952997509

and hats off to Swampy and others who saved Stanton moor and the Nine Ladies from quarry carnage...
there where some sweet tree houses there eg
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/95/405778045_236f68092c.jpg
and the great 'skyraft':
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/53/405778049_04ed2835de.jpg
and not forgetting the 'beast'..
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/154/405778041_4e40f7b663.jpg

In reply to Steve Humm 4395:

Just watched the Wars of the British Tree People documentary the OP mentions. It was very good, much better than the Battle of Rickety Bridge. Thought provoking.

Thoughts, in no particular order:

Clippers on a string round your neck! I'd forgotten them. In fact the whole thing was very evocative of a past time, now there would be mobiles instead of CBs, and the protesters would have the luxury of streaming Game of Thrones on their lap-tops rather than having to have boring interminable late night political discussions.

The singy woman got a bit much, though I liked the shots at the start where one of the baliffs was doing a little dance as she played.

The ex-squaddie was awesome, such a refreshing change to see one of the protesters moving with a 'sense of urgency'.

There was no footage of a sound system blasting techno at 6.00 a.m., I'm disappointed, in fact there was no footage of any sound systems in the trees.

I wonder whether the protest changed anything? The bypass still got built but it must have made the planners think twice about future developments.

It is quite amazing no one died.

In reply to Bobling:

I know the "singy woman", she's done a lot of good stuff protest wise.


There were a large number of ex service personnel at Newbury, most very useful re outdoor skills, logistics, tactics and organisation

Rickety Bridge was to the best of my memory the only eviction with a sound system in the trees, really helped with morale

Staggering considering:

The lack of adherence to Health and Safety (chain saws being used very close to limbs of protestors).

Some of the tactics used by climbing bailiffs, e.g. cutting rope walkways with protestors standing on them, happened to me.

Risks taken by protestors, e.g. not being clipped on (making movement quicker and easier) i adopted this tactic, or in some cases not even wearing a harness during evictions (made it more difficult for bailiffs to lower you out of the trees).

Dangerous lack of knowledge by some protestors re techniques, knots and equipment use. On more than one occasion i had to tell a protestor not to abseil from their gear loop.

In reply to Oceanrower:

Can depend upon the ground, 50 trees in really nice ground isn't very many. Remembered i'd done a few days tree planting, think I did plant 40 or 50 when I was having to jump on the spade sometimes, and they were tiny trees, only a foot and a half high or something like that.

50 bigger trees or more could be possible in nice earth though, it depends.

In reply to Skip: I saw one particulraly nasty thing done by a guy called Sky - it involved him using a knife against one of the climbing baliffs, unlikely to seriously injure the baliff but nasty nonetheless. But I saw the same baliff in question do something really nasty to a harmless tree hugging student protestor. Both were totally out of order. I also saw some tough but fair stuff done by one of the baliffs, ex-Service guy said to a protestor (I was within ear shot) "If you hit me I will hit you back, just a little bit harder than you hit me", this went on for about 5 minutes, baliff guy was totally in control and in my mind within his rights.

But Newbury was also about the fact that I was instantly branded an (eco) terrorist before I had even breached any cordon or banning order - there was massive abuse of human rights. When I arrived I said hello to one of the climbing baliffs (I knew them all) and the balaclava clad decetives (Brays Agency I think) instantly photographed me asked the baliffs who I was (they declined to give names to their credit). When I got taken out of the trees I gave my real name (I knew that I had ID on me) and was videoed giving my details. Kuckily the coppers didn't write my name down correctly

In reply to Graeme Alderson:


Weird to think the guy I used to see route setting in The Foundry as a teenager had been branded a terrorist. ()

I always liked your routes by the way, they had something intricate and nice about them I thought, something creative.

Tim

In reply to Graeme Alderson:

How we move on as a race of people and it sure was a pivotal moment in time not to be be forgotten ...

They should run a where are they now show ... who was it that had the big Dreds with a price on them ?

In reply to Enty:

Seems unlikely given the rates that those boys were on.

In reply to Ian McNeill:

Was talking about this yesterday. First name was Andy, really can't remember his surname. He swapped sides from protester on M11 to bailiff at Newbury.