Forestry Commission scrap right to forage

[Wallenstein]

We are in a police state .

You had a point up to here... we are not in a police state, and to suggest we are is offensive to all those who genuinely live under repressive regimes IMO.

The reason we have H&S is that without it people die. Compare industrial death rates in Italy to see what it's like without H&S - 6.9 deaths per 100,000 workers vs 0.8 in the UK.

Many people hide behind H&S because it's convenient - that's why schools ban nativity plays (not because it's offensive but because it's a royal pain in the **** to organise), or why other stuff gets restricted.

It's not 1215AD any more - things have to change, and the truth is we've never had it so good; there are compromises to be made but I'd swap universal healthcare and minimal infant mortality for the right to pick up sticks in a forest any day.

 

[Jared]

If I swing an axe in my back garden and remove one of my legs... it is my fault.
If I swing an axe on Forestry Comission land and remove one of my legs... it is STILL my fault because I did it to myself.
If I swing an axe on Forestry Comission land and remove SOMEONE ELSE'S leg... it is my fault for not taking care.
In no way whatsoever is the Forestry Comission at fault for anything I do that hurts myself or someone else while on Forestry Comission land.

Common sense, but unfortunately not how it seemingly works.

I do know of a woodland trust that was being sued because a lady tripped over a tree root, and broke her hip, in a woodland of all places!

 

[sapper1]

If it's dangerous to collect firewood from the FC. How long before it becomes dangerous to walk in the forrest . Or am I being cynical/paranoid?

 

[leon-1]

We are not nor would we be classed as freemen.

I am self employed and I was born in Gibraltar, I would be classed as a freeman.

: “We are keen to support the use of wood as a fuel, and the most appropriate way to do this for domestic heating is by encouraging the development of local firewood merchants rather than selling directly to individual householders.

By this statement alone he is basically saying that they are going to be using the establishment of firewood vendors to create revenue that can then be put back into some bureaucrats pocket ...... I mean to provide funds for the forestry commission to plow back into the management of the forests.

“We have a duty of care to the public in our woodlands and a much higher duty of care where we issue permission for particular activities.”
Referring to Mr Kamp, he added: “In the past we have tried to accommodate such requests and we understand his disappointment in this instance.
“But this is an area where we are subject to increasing constraints in terms of Health and Safety.”

I understand duty of care, but a disclaimer is all that's required to get around this, along the lines of a notice at entrances to the woodland areas stating that in the event that you do yourselves damage whilst gathering firewood it is not the responsibility of the FC (it is a conscious decision made by you and the FC by no means either forced you or coerced you into their woodlands to collect wood).

 

[BigShot]

I do know of a woodland trust that was being sued because a lady tripped over a tree root, and broke her hip, in a woodland of all places!

It's a good job I have very low blood pressure to begin with, as things like that would probably kill me if I didn't.
People like that should be beaten in public while everyone watching is informed how they'll get the same if they do such a monumentally stupid thing as that.
I'm fuming again now!
Pants! I'd settled down nicely after my previous rant too. Oh well - time to relax again.

It's not 1215AD any more - things have to change, and the truth is we've never had it so good; there are compromises to be made but I'd swap universal healthcare and minimal infant mortality for the right to pick up sticks in a forest any day.

I'm with you to an extent.
I'd swap massively improved public health and low infant mortality for picking sticks in a wood any day too. The thing is - there's no need for such a compromise.

We owe low infant mortality to a number of things including antibiotics, scans, keyhole and pre-birth heart surgery and much much more besides. None of that would vanish if Joe Average had a right to go onto FC land and gather firewood, mushrooms and other things besides. None of that would vanish if the FC didn't need to fight lawsuits when some complete numpty fell over a root, got hurt and decided it was someone else's fault that she wasn't more careful.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue against H&S at work. It's when H&S is used to line the pockets of idiots who hurt themselves through not paying attention or to keep people away from leisure activities and foraging "for their OWN safety" that the objections start.

 

[elrond]

health and safety what a pile of tosh

without google/hse website i seem to recall

Health and Safety at WORK act 1975 states......blah blah blah


work being the operative word

steve

Steve

The " etc" in the Health & Safety at Work etc Act 1974 covers this kind of situation.

That being said, this has hee haw to do with H&S but a fear by organisations such as this of the " where there is blame, there is a claim" culture prevalent in todays society.

I can pretty much guarantee you that no professional H&S person would suggest banning folks from the woods. It probably stems from their insurance company.

and it should be fought at every turn. If it was on my doorstep I would still be collecting.

 

[bushtuckerman]

You had a point up to here... we are not in a police state, and to suggest we are is offensive to all those who genuinely live under repressive regimes IMO.

The reason we have H&S is that without it people die. Compare industrial death rates in Italy to see what it's like without H&S - 6.9 deaths per 100,000 workers vs 0.8 in the UK.

Many people hide behind H&S because it's convenient - that's why schools ban nativity plays (not because it's offensive but because it's a royal pain in the **** to organise), or why other stuff gets restricted.

It's not 1215AD any more - things have to change, and the truth is we've never had it so good; there are compromises to be made but I'd swap universal healthcare and minimal infant mortality for the right to pick up sticks in a forest any day.

Well you rightly state it as your opinion, as I have given mine. However, to impose one's opinion on others I do not think is right and so to suggest 'they' are offended is a big leap.

For the sake of clarity, I might say that we are becoming a police state, it may not even be mal-intended, but the number of security cameras we have compared to other countries is, quite frankly, odd. It's semantics though.

I don't think anyone in the thread has so far suggested that we should live how our ancestors did in 1215, and to compare the two ages is daft, primarily because over-population and over-cultivation of the land were not such issues back then.

You say you would rather pick up sticks than save everyone, well, so would I. It's natural selection, we either swing with it or run out of space and become forced into it anyway.

One of the Bushcraft mantras often repeated, rightly, on here is the value of knowledge over posessions, and I think this fits just as well into my original argument as any other. The game of 'keepy-uppy' mankind plays with common-, self-sense is constantly under threat from over-sheltering of people. We are not a fragile species...until we bring the rest of the planet with us, anyway.

“We have a duty of care..."

Whenever an official person tells us we have to 'care', I always start wondering how much they care themselves.

The truth is that in England we have a long history of wealth for the few, and it is difficult to shrug off. I heard a friend once say that although the Welsh may long have been oppressed by the English, the English have also been opressed by the English.

 

[BigShot]

I heard a friend once say that although the Welsh may long have been oppressed by the English, the English have also been opressed by the English.

I said something very similar to an Irish friend of mine (in Ireland). There was the issue of opression "by the English". I suggested it wasn't an issue of the English, as all my ancestors (on the English, Scottish and Irish sides of my family - yep, I'm a bit mixed) were opressed by the same handful of people as his were. He agreed and changed his wording for at least that conversation.

It's a good point though.

 

[firecrest]

This isnt a health and saftey issue. They want to employ a bloke to gather the wood who people then have to buy it off, thus making £££ out of what you would get for free.

 

[bushtuckerman]

This isnt a health and saftey issue. They want to employ a bloke to gather the wood who people then have to buy it off, thus making £££ out of what you would get for free.

yup, this is the thing, that it's not really about health nor safety, but that 'Health & Safety' is wheeled out for the purpose of making money.