Bonkers Conkers or Not? What do people think? http://www.bbc.co.uk/new...nottinghamshire-11453198 Brian

as it is Friday lets branch out and suggest that they are trying to get to the root of the problem, and maybe someone has been barking up the wrong tree? Oh no not that old chestnut again!

Horses for courses Brian?! They are not that old either as that would be cheating using a 'laggy'!

John, I dont think it did - I used to leave some in the airing cupboard to dry out they were hard as nails and really difficult the thread - last years conkers hence the term 'laggy' - 'spose that made them laible to shattering - never got me in the eye though! Bye for now, have a good weekend all. Stuie

1970 vs. 2010 Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school. 1970 - Crowd gathers. Johnny wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up best mates for life. 2010 - Police called, arrests Johnny and Mark.. Charge them with assault, both expelled even though Mark started it. Both children go to anger management programs for 3 months. School board hold meeting to implement bullying prevention programs Scenario: Robbie won’t Keep still in class, disrupts other students. 1970 - Robbie sent to office and given 6 of the best by the Headmaster. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again. 2010 - Robbie given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. Tested for ADD. Robbie’s parents get fortnightly disability payments and School gets extra funding from state because Robbie has a disability. Scenario : Billy breaks a window in his neighbor’s car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt. 1970 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman. 2010 - Billy’s dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy removed to foster care and joins a gang. Government psychologist tells Billy’s sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Scenario : Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school. 1970 - Mark gets glass of water from Teacher to take aspirin with. 2010 - Police called, Mark expelled from school for drug violations. Car searched for drugs and weapons. Scenario : Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from Guy Fawkes, puts them in a model airfix paint bottle, blows up an ant’s nest. 1970 - Ants die. 2010- Police, Armed Forces, & Anti-terrorism Squad called. Johnny charged with domestic terrorism, MI5 investigate parents, siblings removed from home, computers confiscated. Johnny’s Dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again. Scenario : Johnny falls while running during break and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary . Mary hugs him to comfort him. 1970 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing. 2010 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in Prison. Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy

But where are the safety glasses?

Why Scottie? have your trousers fallen down? Why does a fireman wear red braces?

I bet that's one tree the Council hopes will succumb to Bleeding Canker soon. Sounds like they're in a cleft stick to me though. Question - If someone is hurt again in the same manner could the council be sued? Could it be the Council has made a financial Risk Management decision rather than a Health & Safety at Work decision? It may be us barking up the wrong tree here.

The council said a girl suffered a serious head injury last year after being hit by a stick - thrown up into the tree to dislodge conkers. Did she throw the stick, was it somebody else? I feel sorry for anyone that has been injured and for that reason I understand what this council has done. They are in a situation of guilty knowledge and as such if another similar incident happened they would be on a sticky wicket. Maybe they could have done something else as a preventative measure that would have drawn less media hype, hindsight is a wonderful thing! However, considering the fatalities in the workplace and the high number of people dying from occupational disease, is this the best the BBC can offer as serious journalism? It resounds that they are mocking the subject which in turn mocks our profession by attempting to stereotype a particular situation.

There is guilty knowledge then, which adds to the proportionality of the response. To the question, why not just chop the trees down, I would say that trees are an amenity and add value of all kinds to an urban environment. Leaving the tree standing while removing the hazard is appropriate. And this is not a 'natural' hazard; conkers falling on people's heads is a natural hazard. The hazard is people being hit on the head with iron bars (not 'sticks' as has been quoted above) thrown by children. This is definitely not bound up in the nature of the tree, John

News, including BBC only report selectively. We do not have all the information or facts behind the decision. We do not know how many local residents may have complained about it. Let us not loose sight of the point that the council did not madly cull all the trees, but the only one whose impact, by their own assessment was "significant" and had caused at least one serious head injury. It is a sad indictment and reflection of the society we live in that the hardcore of miscreants cannot be disciplined.

Clairel Very concise and excellent comments.

Hi, Agree totally with Clairel and Fletcher; if I heard it correctly according to the Council Head of Communications on lunchtime radio the cost to remove rubbish/handlebars /conkers etc from the tree using a MEWP and two staff was just £110, that followed a RA for about 400 similar trees in the area, only this one needed deconkering from their assessment. Regards Steve

Evening All, I agree with jwk that £110 is not excessive to implement a control measure but now that the precedent has been set then £44k ish may need to be spent to bring all the other trees to the same "safe" condition. I still do not see why this action was taken. Perhaps a comment from Lord Young as I am sure he reads the forums!!! Take Care All

Nottingham city council will have their own equipment and guys to do the job which would keep their costs down. Do we know if they spoke to their internal H&S guys first.

£110? In an LA it would cost more than that to instruct and mobilise!

Not sure whats Notts council would make of this?? Please do not view if you are easily offended http://www.dailymotion.c...pain-men-nut-conkers_fun

Afternoon All, Not sure if this is mentioned above as I have only read the odd post. For me this was a complete waste of effort and money and its this sort of story that makes H&S a joke. Also I would suggest that by doing this the council have opened them self wide open for a claim. If a child has an accident on a tree in the same area then my case would be that the council have identified there is a risk (hence there picking of the other tree) so why have they not ensure preventative measures have been taken on this tree or any other in the area?

Ok boys and girls, that's that one done to death. Why do Firemen wear red braces?