Any damage caused by speeding and drink driving can never be undone but a replacement tree can easily be planted.   The idiocy of the two situations is not helped by people who seem to think that the tree episode is the more serious and I wonder what their reaction might be if they were involved with a speeding drunken driver?

Not sure how  you come to the conclusion that people think the tree episode is more serious or even that the sentence was more onerous than the one the man got for dangerous driving ?:|

In the case of the tree the sentence imposed meant that the perpetrator only made £12k profit in the first year rather than £40k.  In other words it was no penalty at all!