If you haven't been to the site, then I would be careful about identifying the condition of the site before and after the chippers were out there.

You refer to "the mess the diggers had made" when in fact, the site was not left in pristine condition by the workers that prepped the site. There was no "smoothing the ground back". I was out there the second day, in the morning. There were several spots where the chips that had been found where the earth movers had left large depressions and gouges in the finished grade of the site. Those marks and depressions were not made by diggers and had I been the owner of the site, I would not have accepted the work as finsihed and allowed the contractor to leave it like that.

I cannot speak for the condition of the site, but none of the pictures I have seen show the site in much worse condition than it was the first day Barry and I went out. If Jim can add anything to that, I'd like to hear his opinion.

I think the tone of your reaction is a little unwarranted. Using terms like "fools" and "idots" will not endear yourself to the rest of the chipping world.

Speaking as an "owner" of construction sites, those sign went up not because of the digging (which would take less than an hour to clean up in that corner and would have to be done to prep the ground for the foundation anyway given the condition they left it in) but because of the liability issues associated with having so many people out on a "construction" site with hazards such as uneven ground, broken glass, chunks of conduit, rebar, metal, plastic that could create a situation for an injury. Had they not posted it, the liability would be theirs. In the "sue somebody" environment that exisits in the US, I would have left those signs up from day 1.

I agree that someone walking around a public park and digging holes would prompt such a reaction... but it is what's left of a destruction project and a future construction site.

Maybe a more tempered response would be in order?