Archive for Downsizer For an ethical approach to consumption
 


       Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Mutton

Petition to protect woodland from sell-off of public land

What the title says - trying to get woodland to be exempt from the bill regarding sell off of public land.

Sign here:

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/infrastructure-bill#petition
Ty Gwyn

Is this Public land/forests not owned by someone on their deeds,
Before a sale can occur?
Mistress Rose

Think it is a re-iteration of the attempt a while back to sell off the publicly owned forest. If the information from 38 degrees is accurate, it would mean that all rights of way in these woodlands would be stopped as well. It seems it is embedded somewhere in a large bill. I did follow the link, but only got a very small summary of the bill, which didn't mention this. Rather suspect that it is a small clause which means the Lords will have to read it very carefully. As I understand, there is an amendment being put before the Lords to remove woodland from this.
vegplot

Rights of way are by definition rights. Not sure how they would be affected by the land being sold.
dpack

Rights of way are by definition rights. Not sure how they would be affected by the land being sold.


what some think of as rights of way are in law permissive paths and permission can be revoked
Hairyloon

Woodland generally has to stay as woodland and rights of way are very difficult to close.

I don't understand what the fuss is about. How many people here own, or would like to own a bit of woodland?
Jamanda

The fuss is that it soon may not be the case that woodland has to stay as woodland.
Ty Gwyn

The fuss is that it soon may not be the case that woodland has to stay as woodland.


I wonder if this is in the run up to the fracking bonanza,
I`m thinking of the Bowland forest,its smack in the way on route from Fylde to Yorkshire?
Hairyloon

The fuss is that it soon may not be the case that woodland has to stay as woodland.
If that is the case, then that is what we should be fighting about, and not getting distracted by who owns it.
Mistress Rose

That bit of the bill was thrown out thanks to the petitions I am glad to say.

I do own a bit of woodland. It has rights of way through it and we allow people to use other paths such as management tracks. We do reserve the right to close the non-statutory rights of way and have lodged this with the council. The main problem is that people cannot understand that it is privately owned or that if it was council owned they would be restricted even more than we expect. Some think they can do what they like because it is 'council'.
Hairyloon

Some think they can do what they like because it is 'council'.
Was it "council"?
Perhaps put better signs at the entrances?
One would hope you could get a grant to pay for it if you point out the public benefit.
Mistress Rose

As my son puts it, it has been in private ownership since some great hairy Anglo Saxon said 'I own it'. Most owners have allowed public access, as well as the public footpaths and bridlepath, but we are seriously thinking of putting up a sign saying Privately Owned Woodland.

It is possible to get grants to pay for aspects of public access, but generally you have to agree to letting the public in for a certain length of time and the value of the grant is not really worth the tie. For instance, if we suddenly felt we needed to keep the public just on the public rights of way, we wouldn't be able to if we had the grant, for whatever reason, except things like foot and mouth restrictions. We may get a grant for a sign board, but it would probably only cover a maximum of 40-50% of the price. Might be cheaper to make it ourselves.
Hairyloon

We may get a grant for a sign board, but it would probably only cover a maximum of 40-50% of the price. Might be cheaper to make it ourselves.
So put your price up a bit, send yourself the bill and claim the 50% grant. Wink
       Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Page 1 of 1
Home Home Home Home Home