Felled Trees Make Way For Space Shuttle Endeavor

g under p

Felled trees make way for space shuttle Endeavour (+video)



Hard to believe they are taking down over a hunderd majestic trees so that the Shuttle will find it's new home. Even though they will replace 2 trees for every one they take down it's STILL just NOT the same. Not even close. :(

Peace

hedonist

Yeah, I caught this on the local news earlier in the week. What a bloody shame about those trees, each and every one of them.

"Officials have said they will have to remove about 400 trees and reposition signs, streetlights and traffic signals to make room for the spaceplane, which has a 58-foot-tal tail and a 78-foot wingspan."

I understand they got "community input", but I'd be pissed if I lived in or commuted through that area and had to deal with all of the repositioning nonsense.

brianlux

AUUGGHHH!!! Sorry, but this kind of thing is crazy making. It's going into a museum- they aren't going to use it again. Why not just take the wings off and move it- so what if a few tiles are damaged? Or better yet, do what DC and leave it on display at the airport.

The disregard so many have for trees is mind boggling. About 12 years ago a long row of trees was planted in the median on East Bidwell St. in Folsom, CA. These trees were just getting to be a good sized and beautiful and the city of Folsom came in and pulled them all out with this gigantic plucking machine like they were weeds, made a few minor changes to the median and replanted with thin little saplings. AUUGGHHH!!!
:fp:

Jeanwah

Was it really necessary? WTF?

chadwick

trees are cooler than nasa, all space shuttles, and 99.9% of all the people on the planet all put together...

Cosmo

Well... there is another side to the story.
Older trees in parks and forests are one thing... along a city street is another. The root systems do millions of dollar of damage to concrete and asphalt surfaces, drainage/sewer, water supply pipes and valves and underground communications networks. Their branches will interfere with power lines and can pose hazzards during servere wind conditions.
Also, the people who planted the trees way back in the 1930s didn't know much about trees and planted trees with sprawling root systems on street medians and narrow sidewalk parkways. In othere words, you don't plant an oak tree in an area that is 2 and a half freet wide. Just like you don't plant a 5 foot redwood next to your house, right?
This may be a good opportunity to plant drought resillient native plant species in these areas and reduce the amount of clean water we are currently using. We will need water for the future... if we can reduce the city run-off, it may be in our best interests.
...
Now... before you comment... I just want you to know I consider myself an environmentalist. I believe in the preservation of our natural resources so future generations can enjoy what we have. The city... is the city. Just because someone planted imported species of trees, along what is now a boulevard of used car lots and liquor stores, 80 years ago doesn't make them an eco-system. Again, if it were in a vast area, such as Griffith or Elysian Park, where the tree's roots can grow to support its branch system... that is a different story.
And how do you get a Space Shuttle from LAX to the County Museum at Exposition Park? Something has to give.

g under p

Cosmo wrote:

Well... there is another side to the story.
Older trees in parks and forests are one thing... along a city street is another. The root systems do millions of dollar of damage to concrete and asphalt surfaces, drainage/sewer, water supply pipes and valves and underground communications networks. Their branches will interfere with power lines and can pose hazzards during servere wind conditions.
Also, the people who planted the trees way back in the 1930s didn't know much about trees and planted trees with sprawling root systems on street medians and narrow sidewalk parkways. In othere words, you don't plant an oak tree in an area that is 2 and a half freet wide. Just like you don't plant a 5 foot redwood next to your house, right?
This may be a good opportunity to plant drought resillient native plant species in these areas and reduce the amount of clean water we are currently using. We will need water for the future... if we can reduce the city run-off, it may be in our best interests.
...
Now... before you comment... I just want you to know I consider myself an environmentalist. I believe in the preservation of our natural resources so future generations can enjoy what we have. The city... is the city. Just because someone planted imported species of trees, along what is now a boulevard of used car lots and liquor stores, 80 years ago doesn't make them an eco-system. Again, if it were in a vast area, such as Griffith or Elysian Park, where the tree's roots can grow to support its branch system... that is a different story.
And how do you get a Space Shuttle from LAX to the County Museum at Exposition Park? Something has to give.

You know I have to say you do have a valid point. Those trees planted in the city many years ago root system are not deep to support itself many years later. Some do interfere with drainage and water pipes and in times of storms do not hold themselves up well. They can cause many accidents and damage to homes as I've seen in DC. I STILL wished they could have done something else or placed the shuttle elsewhere.

Peace

Cosmo

g under p wrote:

You know I have to say you do have a valid point. Those trees planted in the city many years ago root system are not deep to support itself many years later. Some do interfere with drainage and water pipes and in times of storms do not hold themselves up well. They can cause many accidents and damage to homes as I've seen in DC. I STILL wished they could have done something else or placed the shuttle elsewhere.

Peace

...
I would much rather see trees... as long as the trees are healthy and given the space that trees need in order to thrive... like in a park or something.
Some years ago, here in Long Beach, we had some heavy rains... something we are not used to. The ground was saturated to the point where it could not absorb any more water. Needless to say, we lost a whole bunch of 70+ year old trees that could no longer support their massive, untrimmed branches. Budget cuts had limited the tree trimming... we need more cops and fire fighters and road crews, instead. Cuts had to come from somewhere.
Anyway, when those trees came down, they took out power lines, cable t.v. and phone service. The roots ripped up the streets and sidewalks and some fell on parked cars, homes and garages. It was a mess. Everyone complained... of course... even though they complained about tax spending. Cuts were made... on things like tree maintenance. The cost to fix the roads and sidewalks, power lines, etc... were pretty high. New trees were planted, this time, with pipes driven into the ground. This allows the water to run straight down and deeper, causing the tree to send its roots down to the water, rather and across the surface. It makes the tree stronger against the forces of nature, such as wind and water.
Still... people complain because these are young trees and do not provide the same shade as the 70 year old trees. Well, no fucking shit, people... where can anyone get 70 year old replacement trees? Not at the local nursery.
...
I really hope that they landscape the medians with local, native plants that can survive in the natural arid environment and save water for better usage.

hedonist

Cosmo wrote:

I really hope that they landscape the medians with local, native plants that can survive in the natural arid environment and save water for better usage.

I hope so too. It just makes me sad if they were perfectly fine as they were and where they were.

That said, I was walking on Larchmont Blvd. yesterday, and those sidewalks were up and down and this way and that from roots. Crazy to navigate! Felt like I was in some kind of funhouse.

catefrances

Cosmo wrote:

...
And how do you get a Space Shuttle from LAX to the County Museum at Exposition Park? Something has to give.

dismantle it and re attached its wings and tail when it reaches its final resting place.

Cosmo

catefrances wrote:

dismantle it and re attached its wings and tail when it reaches its final resting place.

...
Yeah... but, that's no fun.
I think they should put it on the back of a truck and drive it from LAX to the museum... with the entire L.A. Kings Team sitting on top... hoisting the Stanley Cup.
That would be so fricken' AWESOME.

catefrances

Cosmo wrote:

catefrances wrote:

dismantle it and re attached its wings and tail when it reaches its final resting place.

...
Yeah... but, that's no fun.
I think they should put it on the back of a truck and drive it from LAX to the museum... with the entire L.A. Kings Team sitting on top... hoisting the Stanley Cup.
That would be so fricken' AWESOME.

yes that would be awesome............... for kings fans. the rest of us, not so much.

brianlux

Question: Would I get pounded on mercilessly here if I said I think we should stop despoiling our atmosphere by blasting more junk into orbit and then chopping down trees so somebody can show off their billion dollar sky mobile and instead use the damn thing as a planter box for some of those trees that need replacing? I don't really expect any of that to happen and it's not like a major ax to grind for me but I really do kind of lean in that direction. I know- the answer I will most likely get is that the space program creates technology. But don't they do most of the tinkering and building down here on earth anyway? And do we really need more polluting technology? And don't we have more pressing issues to deal with right her on good old planet earth? Another thing that bugs me is that, besides the moon, the brightest light in the night sky is another piece of future space junk.

Too honest?

catefrances

brianlux wrote:

Question: Would I get pounded on mercilessly here if I said I think we should stop despoiling our atmosphere by blasting more junk into orbit and then chopping down trees so somebody can show off their billion dollar sky mobile and instead use the damn thing as a planter box for some of those trees that need replacing? I don't really expect any of that to happen and it's not like a major ax to grind for me but I really do kind of lean in that direction. I know- the answer I will most likely get is that the space program creates technology. But don't they do most of the tinkering and building down here on earth anyway? And do we really need more polluting technology? And don't we have more pressing issues to deal with right her on good old planet earth? Another thing that bugs me is that, besides the moon, the brightest light in the night sky is another piece of future space junk.

Too honest?

i agree... might i suggest that humankind look inwards to their own world and their own well being. there is so much we dont know about our own planet so why not concentrate on being the best we can be here on earth before we start jetting off into outer space. every contact leaves a trace and we have to remember that when we look towards other planets. i know humans are a curious species. and i know it appears we have a limited attention span.. otherwise why would we be on mars when there is so much yet to discover on earth? we seem to be rushing head long into the future without any thought to the present and i find it disheartening that the money so very much needed here on earth is spent on space exploration.

brianlux

catefrances wrote:

brianlux wrote:

Question: Would I get pounded on mercilessly here if I said I think we should stop despoiling our atmosphere by blasting more junk into orbit and then chopping down trees so somebody can show off their billion dollar sky mobile and instead use the damn thing as a planter box for some of those trees that need replacing? I don't really expect any of that to happen and it's not like a major ax to grind for me but I really do kind of lean in that direction. I know- the answer I will most likely get is that the space program creates technology. But don't they do most of the tinkering and building down here on earth anyway? And do we really need more polluting technology? And don't we have more pressing issues to deal with right her on good old planet earth? Another thing that bugs me is that, besides the moon, the brightest light in the night sky is another piece of future space junk.

Too honest?

i agree... might i suggest that humankind look inwards to their own world and their own well being. there is so much we dont know about our own planet so why not concentrate on being the best we can be here on earth before we start jetting off into outer space. every contact leaves a trace and we have to remember that when we look towards other planets. i know humans are a curious species. and i know it appears we have a limited attention span.. otherwise why would we be on mars when there is so much yet to discover on earth? we seem to be rushing head long into the future without any thought to the present and i find it disheartening that the money so very much needed here on earth is spent on space exploration.

Nicely said, Catefrances!

whygohome

chadwick wrote:

trees are cooler than nasa, all space shuttles, and 99.9% of all the people on the planet all put together...

Agreed