You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
There is to be a pre-sentencing report commissioned for one of the defendants. I’m erring on their being some not-yet diagnosed medical diagnosis put forward suggesting that he didn’t appreciate the gravity of cutting down the tree. That being the position, do they then effectively concede guilt?
Or do they look into effect on family if he is incarcerated?
Pre-sentencing reports are normal for anyone likely to be sent to jail for the first time, or for the umpteenth time! They cover all sort of background. Mental health, learning difficulties, family circumstances, networks (i.e. do they hand around with other dodgy folk or have a job and positive community ties), understanding of their crime, likelihood of reoffending, options for community sentences (e.g. are they fit for unpaid work, do they live somewhere suitable for tags etc). If someone had recognised / diagnosed mental health conditions then psychiatrist may also be commissioned to write report etc.
but if people making policital points get prison for throwing paint at stuff or destroying statues I think unlikely to walk free after the sentencing hearing
Well, we’ll see. It will be interesting if they get less than someone damaging a picture frame.
Imagine being banged up with a bunch of real wrong 'uns and having to admit you're inside for chopping down a tree.
I’m really not sure the story is the headline grabbing top of the news feature it has become.
Whilst clearly this was an act of unfathomable vandalism, the country is blighted the length and breadth with anti social behaviour stories that are truly life affecting to people trapped in the world they are surrounded by.
This is really just a middle class ‘tut’ in comparison.
The absolute state of them.
You shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but who the actual **** thinks that rocking up at court - or indeed, anywhere - sporting a suit and tie and a balaclava is a smart move? You're on trial for vandalism, not auditioning for the Blue Man Group.
You shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but who the actual **** thinks that rocking up at court - or indeed, anywhere - sporting a suit and tie and a balaclava is a smart move? You're on trial for vandalism, not auditioning for the Blue Man Group.
People who are worried that mountain bikers are going to judge them on their appearance?
there is a weird anomaly where they cannot be photographed inside the court building but they can be photographed going in.
but if people making policital points get prison for throwing paint at stuff or destroying statues I think unlikely to walk free after the sentencing hearing
Not necessarily destroying, or even slightly damaging, statues, according to the current Labour government.
Although it does depend on whose statue it is. God forbid anyone should be overcome with patriotic zeal and climb the statue of the greatest Briton that has ever walked the face of the earth.
Apparently that makes you a "thug". Which must make sycamore choppers almost murders.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/34824357/churchill-statue-thugs-face-jail/
"Currently only demonstrators who cause criminal damage to the monument can be prosecuted".
but who the actual **** thinks that rocking up at court - or indeed, anywhere - sporting a suit and tie and a balaclava is a smart move?
I assume they took them off inside otherwise it would be a brave move. As poly says inside the court there are restrictions on photos with it normally still relying on court artists. As such it does kinda make sense to hide your face when going into court if, I dunno, you have committed a crime which will get national publicity and lots of people hurling abuse at you. Especially if you seem hopeful of getting let off (if not then plead guilty for shorter sentence). Obviously undermined by the papers grabbing all the photos from social media instead but its not a completely stupid plan.
I remember a time when prisoners being escorted from a Black Maria to the Old Bailey were given a blanket to cover their heads.
I don't think that happens anymore.
but some of the utter emotional nonsense is ridiculous.
Sez someone who knows to the penny the cost of everything, but the value of nothing. 🖕🏼
I'm disgusted by the felling of that Yew. These are precious with medicinal properties, berries for the birds, evergreen thus providing shelter for all sorts of beasties all year round.
Yes, their clippings are harvested for a particular cancer treatment, but beyond that, the deliberate destruction of a tree that’s as old as the creation of England as a kingdom is shameful. He should be subject to a compulsory purchase order, evicted from the land, and the farm turned over to a managed nature reserve, with the money put back into its management, and nothing given to him, as a fine. I’d like to think that neither him, nor any of his family benefits from this act
They’re hardly going to throw resources at a tree worth zero.
It’s got a significant value, definitely not ‘zero’. Wake up at the back there, and at least try to pay attention!
Mature trees are worth a lot of money
Mature trees are worth a lot of money
Not that much really. Media is quoting £600K but in truth its far less.
https://felling.uk/calculator/tree-value
There's something wrong in the calculation, or it's for the timber or something.
I'm not sure which method(s) they used to value this tree, but look up the CAVAT method for example.
I'm not sure which method(s) they used to value this tree,
Probably £700-£800 cubic meter. Of clear timber that is , though looking at that tree its short and mostly branchwood
What about "amenity value"?
The owner of the land is the National Trust, and I'm sure they could make a decent argument about the number of visitors choosing to visit in part due to this particular vista - it had to be one of the most photographed trees in the region.
And the National Park might say it's likely to lose out on parking revenue well into the future.
One of the modules I’ve been studying this year has a fair bit about ecosystem services that trees provide, a selection are:
- Supporting services: nutrient cycling, soil formation, primary production, habitat provision
- Regulating services: climate regulation, flood regulation, water purification
- Cultural services: spiritual, aesthetic, educational, recreational
- Provisioning services: food production, water, wood and fibre, fuel
each one of these can have a £ value calculated against it.
No direct experience of calculating CAVAT but can't see it's formula being so easy to follow here.
What use is a fine in the hundreds of thousands in this situation anyway? It's not a developer making a calculated decision for greed with financial assets to their name.
The new rules that did away with upper limits on fines a few years ago also included custodial sentencing but think it rather had developers, landowners and loose contractors in mind.
No direct experience of calculating CAVAT but can't see it's formula being so easy to follow here.
What use is a fine in the hundreds of thousands in this situation anyway? It's not a developer making a calculated decision for greed with financial assets to their name.
The new rules that did away with upper limits on fines a few years ago also included custodial sentencing but think it rather had developers, landowners and loose contractors in mind.
Sorry just to be clear CAVAT was just an example method of valuing trees that takes more into account that trunk circumference x height. It looks at the amenity value, health of the tree etc. I don't know if it's appropriate to this exact tree.
Dyna-Ti's previously linked calculator only goes up to 35m, not 45m as per the tree in question. But at 35m x 1m trunk it gives £175 as the value.
Well a quick google shows that to buy a sycamore with 8cm trunk costs £150 so there's no way that even just 'a tree' with a trunk that's more than 10 times thicker would really be valued at only £25 more. Then you have to factor in the location, amenity value of it, etc.
Well whatever it costs commercially, it sure aint £600K And TBH its not that great a timber.
Well whatever it costs commercially, it sure aint £600K And TBH its not that great a timber.
Yeah I'm sure that's true, but as far as I'm aware the £600K is referring to the value of the tree as a living entity, not the timber.
Probably £700-£800 cubic meter. Of clear timber that is , though looking at that tree its short and mostly branchwood
Mona Lisa - just a bit of canvas and a few quids' worth of paint.
Which is the point I was trying to make on the previous page. The tree couldn't be replaced, so priceless.
The tree couldn't be replaced, so priceless.
Er... isn't it currently regrowing.
Sure that will take a while, but far from 'irreplaceable'
Er... isn't it currently regrowing.
And if it didn't, I've got a bunch of (unwanted) seedlings in my garden, anyone who wants one can have one.
Of course it was a moronic act of vandalism, but it's only a tree (and a not very old sycamore at that). We had to get a similar one cut down in our garden a few years back, as it was pushing a boundary wall over.
but it's only a tree (and a not very old sycamore at that).
I think that’s more or less what the perpetrators said, wasn’t it?
We had to get a similar one cut down in our garden a few years back, as it was pushing a boundary wall over.
What boundary wall ........the one which defines the outer limits of your empire and the marauding Picts?
You are Hadrian and I claim my 5 denarius
(and a not very old sycamore at that)
Fast growing too.
Apparently between 3'-5'/year. So to get back to it's 50' height, we're looking at minimum of 10 years.
Sorry your child has been run over & killed but you can have another one, it'll grow quite quickly, probably be over 5ft within 15yrs, so even bigger than the one you've just lost.
CAVAT is a pretty good tool for an average tree in an average location and a good starting point
This isn't a particularly average tree in terms of emotion and revenue generation, so some sort of multiplier is required and that is harder to quantify. A tree in Swansea recently totalled £420k fine between developer, his company and felling contractor.
In basic material values, the tree at best is £200 for firewood market, 1 year old sycamore trees are about 35p each and you'd plant a handful with a bit of follow up care to get one standard. The labour outstrips any timber outcome.
So yeah, I estimate somewhere between £150 and a million quid 😄
(and a not very old sycamore at that)
Fast growing too.
Apparently between 3'-5'/year. So to get back to it's 50' height, we're looking at minimum of 10 years.
It was at least 150 years old according to wiki? (and it says 45m not 50 feet, could be a typo though)
CAVAT is a pretty good tool for an average tree in an average location and a good starting point
This isn't a particularly average tree in terms of emotion and revenue generation, so some sort of multiplier is required and that is harder to quantify. A tree in Swansea recently totalled £420k fine between developer, his company and felling contractor.
In basic material values, the tree at best is £200 for firewood market, 1 year old sycamore trees are about 35p each and you'd plant a handful with a bit of follow up care to get one standard. The labour outstrips any timber outcome.
So yeah, I estimate somewhere between £150 and a million quid 😄
There's some discussion of the valuation by a barrister in the second half of this (and sentencing in the first half)
and it says 45m not 50 feet, could be a typo though
I'm kind of guessing, though I noticed the 45m bit posted above, but thats the equivalent of a 15story building, and its nowhere near the height of one of those.
But it does look to be about the height of a 5 story building, at least averaging from the pic on the above YT vid
and it says 45m not 50 feet, could be a typo though
I'm kind of guessing, though I noticed the 45m bit posted above, but thats the equivalent of a 15story building, and its nowhere near the height of one of those.
But it does look to be about the height of a 5 story building, at least averaging from the pic on the above YT vid
Yeah probably somebody mixed up m with ' on the measurements 🙄 either way it's still over 150 years old though
Anyway the reason i was coming back to the thread, looks like this two were real assets to the community:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8v8leg97eo
Various histories seem to exist, but surely someone could have counted the rings by now!
Anyway the reason i was coming back to the thread, looks like this two were real assets to the community:
Tbh I'm not entirely surprised, feeling an emotional attachment to a sycamore tree does sound gay.
And men who chop down trees are obviously proper geezers.
Frankly it all makes sense imo
The "you can do what you like" game.
Summer club rides mean I could be out Monday, Wednesday and Thursday. We also need marshalls for Tuesday TTs.
Appeal for TT marshalls tonight - I check if it's OK if I help out and get "you can do what you like". What I'd like is a simple "yes, that's fine" or "no, I'd to do X tonight".
Instead I feel like I've fallen into a trap and evidence will be used against me later.
The tree couldn't be replaced, so priceless.
Well it could... With a native tree rather than a non native, deliberately planted there to make the scenery look nice...
We were passing by on the way to Keswick earlier so went to take a look. There's a nice little memorial stone there. It was pleasantly busy. Lots of people walking along the wall proper with big packs.
Well it could... With a native tree rather than a non native, deliberately planted there to make the scenery look nice...
Was it? That seems to indicate an enormous amount of foresight - a tree seed, or sapling put somewhere where anything could have easily happened to it, like livestock or wild animals just eating it or ringbarking it, like deer do. A native tree could just as easily have died, been eaten across such a period of time, and not become a feature of the landscape.
Well i think thats the generally accepted story. John Clayton planted it. Protected it while jts young etc just like any other planted tree.
I am not for one second suggesting its not a big deal but i am very very onboard with the poster talking about all the daft emotion. Sycamore is a weed a single tree in that location is an artifical sight created by grazing or for shooting there should be trees all over the shop.
The punishment should be planting thousands of native trees not locking them up because the tree is a bit special.
That tree cut down by Toby's Carvery is a bigger deal.
I would never condone thier stupid stunt,but reading some of the details around their lives and upbringing was grim.
There are thousands more like them,and they are adrift.
the majority of people in the criminal justice system have been failed by society at some point and end up there because of circumstance. But it clearly would send a poor message if actions on this scale, with this degree of premeditation, didn’t have significant sanctions.I would never condone thier stupid stunt,but reading some of the details around their lives and upbringing was grim.
There are thousands more like them,and they are adrift.
That tree cut down by Toby's Carvery is a bigger deal.
But probably not a crime! The species of tree or how many hundreds of years old etc is really not significant to the crime. The point is they went out of their way to lug a chainsaw in the dark across someone else’s property to cut a tree down for a laugh.
..jails are full of the bad, the mad and the sadthe majority of people in the criminal justice system have been failed by society at some point and end up there because of circumstance. But it clearly would send a poor message if actions on this scale, with this degree of premeditation, didn’t have significant sanctions.I would never condone thier stupid stunt,but reading some of the details around their lives and upbringing was grim.
There are thousands more like them,and they are adrift.
A load of bleeding heart Guardianistas arguing that a prison sentence is a bit much for a stupid act of vandalism.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/14/sycamore-gap-tree-duo-do-not-belong-in-prison
As a social worker who wrote hundreds of pre-sentence reports before becoming a criminologist, and someone who has been to prison before all of that, I would.....
Well judging by the eloquent letter which Dr Rod Earle had published in the Guardian I can't help thinking that prison did him the world of good.
Good on you geezer!
A load of bleeding heart Guardianistas arguing that a prison sentence is a bit much for a stupid act of vandalism.
I don't read the guardian but it is.
They could be made to do something useful. As i pointed out before make em plant 10000 native trees.
I think i would rather take the porridge.
So 4 years & 3 months each (minus time already served), and a crushed Range Rover.......
40% of sentence to be served inside & rest on licence.
Wow - significant jail time. Thats a surprise to me. Shows how much crimes against property are sentenced harsher than crimes against people
"Daniel Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32, have each been jailed for four years and three months after being convicted of criminal damage to the much-loved Sycamore Gap tree, which had stood for more than 100 years in a fold in the landscape.
The judge said the pair would be released no later than 40 per cent through their prison sentences.
Each will serve a further six months concurrently for the damage the pair caused to Hadrian’s Wall as a result of the felling."
Edit - dagnamit - too slow by seconds 🙂
Daniel Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32
I'd seen pics of them before, but had only seen Carruthers age. I'd thought it strange that a younger bloke was hanging around with someone so much older than him. I now see the gap is only 7 years! Graham, must have had a tough paper round...
Thats a surprise to me. Shows how much crimes against property are sentenced harsher than crimes against people
In this case I don't think the sentence is about a crime against property per se. Its about the vandalism of something that society as a whole greatly valued. ( & not for its financial value as a tree)
It’s a truly unique level of stupid to end up in prison for cutting down a tree. Something they’re no doubt sick of having pointed out to them by their fellow inmates
In this case I don't think the sentence is about a crime against property per se. Its about the vandalism of something that society as a whole greatly valued. ( & not for its financial value as a tree)
I dont think the law works like that and TBH it shouldnt. Because then its all down to emotion perception, rather than following sentencing guidelines.
Be interested to know how the judge arrived at that figure
Wow - significant jail time. Thats a surprise to me. Shows how much crimes against property are sentenced harsher than crimes against people
"Daniel Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32, have each been jailed for four years and three months after being convicted of criminal damage to the much-loved Sycamore Gap tree, which had stood for more than 100 years in a fold in the landscape.
The judge said the pair would be released no later than 40 per cent through their prison sentences.
Each will serve a further six months concurrently for the damage the pair caused to Hadrian’s Wall as a result of the felling."
This country lags well behind other European countries regarding the amount of forest cover, treatment of old, valuable trees, and the fines that can be imposed on people guilty of crimes against those trees - these two asshats could have been fined up to £400,000 in at least one country. There are trees in the U.K. older than Stonehenge, that’s around 5000 years old, which have no legal protections!
There are greater fines imposed on people who steal money, than those who damage something that’s irreplaceable.
From the BBC, earlier:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnvmpz5qqe5o?utm_source=flipboard&utm_content=user/BBCNews
It's happening more and more with general building developments too:
No, you can't cut the trees down.
Ooops, we already did, must have been a miscommunication with our contractor. Still, now that we've cut them down, we can't put them back so we may as well build those houses / that out-of-town shopping centre that, by sheer coincidence, we had planned for this site. What's that, a £100,000 fine? OK, no worries, the development will make us £10m so that's no problem.
Same way that listed buildings mysteriously catch fire just a day after the council has said "no, it's a listed building, your development is refused".
They literally factor in the cost of a fine onto the overall development.
An entire woodland can be utterly destroyed within a few hours, long before any enforcement can turn up and put a stop to it. Needs to be unlimited fines and a complete restoration order - you must completely replant the woodland, plus 20% extra land which you need to buy, at your own expense. It'll never be the same again obviously but it'd be a bit more of a deterrent.