Government trying to sell off woodlands, again.

[Shambling Shaman]

Government trying to sell off woodlands, again.

Sorry if this is else wear.

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/keep-our-woods-safe#petition



[video=youtube;Jd22b-L_wt8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded& v=Jd22b-L_wt8[/video]

 

[shaggystu]

signed, and shared via facebook, twitter, etc.

 

[Cromm]

Saw it and signed to stop it.

 

[awarner]

What the link above does not say is what would be the outcome of woodland that is sold? or is this fear that any new owners would abuse their land?
Also how much wodland are we actually talking about as I thought most would already be owned by estates and forrestry commissions etc?

I would love to own my own bit of woodland as such but would be interested to know what this campain was actually about apart from the obvious selling point.

 

[slowworm]

You're expected to just sign the petition without actually knowing anything.

This is the link to the Independent Forestry panel http://www.defra.gov.uk/forestrypanel/ and in the evidence and views section there's some reports that may be useful to read.

 

[shaggystu]

edit: original post deleted.

this is bound to get political, and i'm really in the mood for an argument so should probably just leave it well alone

cheers

stuart

 

[Shambling Shaman]

You're expected to just sign the petition without actually knowing anything..

Oddly no,

I posted it up as I thought it was relevant. I do remember the big to-do last time they tried it.

http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=63408&highlight=selling+woodlands

 

[rik_uk3]

You can't do anything with or on the bulk of the woodlands so I don't see how it will impact on us anyway.

 

[Manacles]

Among others I posted it aswell, it is very vague and even 38 degrees say in their minimal text that it is only rumours. Having said that, it has also been rumoured that access to the countryside may be limited in the not too distant future as well. I am of the opinion that it hurts nobody to sign the petition, and if it turns out to be true then we've done our bit, if it doesn't, well it's cost us nothing.

It doesn't hurt to have these issues "on the radar".........

 

[slowworm]

I am of the opinion that it hurts nobody to sign the petition, and if it turns out to be true then we've done our bit, if it doesn't, well it's cost us nothing.

I think the opposite is true. Because the petition is so vague I think it devalues well thought out and meaningful petitions and frankly I would expect policy makers to just ignore it. In this particular case what if the independent group suggest selling of some woodlands in order to raise money to create new ones? As I'm sure people know by now the FC currently sells off woodland, has done for years, and the access to the public isn't affected and is unlikely to be affected in future.

 

[boatman]

In some cases access has been severely limited using the arguments of mess and vandalism that apparently some on this forum would like to see used to limit access to all but "real" bushcrafters. If we want the FCC to be more liberal in say wild camping permission then it is nonsense to also say that reducing the stock of public woodland does not matter.

 

[Retired Member southey]

Just to say that the 38 degrees group had their servers hacked and details of all those who had signed petitions taken, after I signed one regarding the HSS rail project I then received countless spam mails, not to mention five circular emails by 38 degrees them selves containing hundreds of CC email addresses belonging to other signatories.

 

[Androo]

Does signing a petition actually have weight any more?
If there is money to be made in selling off woodlands, then they will be sold regardless of public opinion - that kind of action from governments the 'democratised' world over has been evident time after time. As the guy in the video mentions, the government do not work for the people. There is no accountablity built to the systems.
Yea, a petition and some activism might well appear to stall a matter for the short term, but surely the bloated, inefficient, corrupt and self-serving government is the real issue here, not whether that goverment is making another catastrophic error or not...

I will sign the petition, as saying nothing lets them get away with thinking that what they are doing is the right thing.

I have alot of opinion on this so shall stop here!

 

[Manacles]

I think the opposite is true. Because the petition is so vague I think it devalues well thought out and meaningful petitions and frankly I would expect policy makers to just ignore it. In this particular case what if the independent group suggest selling of some woodlands in order to raise money to create new ones? As I'm sure people know by now the FC currently sells off woodland, has done for years, and the access to the public isn't affected and is unlikely to be affected in future.

I hear what you say, but we'll agree to disgree on a couple of points. Yes, the petition is vague, and perhaps a little premature, however, I do not believe that it would 'devalue well thought out and meaningful petitions' in that it is a reprise of the earlier campaign against sale of woodlands - which was sufficiently well thought out for Ministers to halt the programme.

As regards access being likely to be affected in the future, I would simply say that it is well worth checking out some of the country activity orientated organisations, many of whom are raising concerns at rumours that land access may well be curtialed to some degree in the future.

 

[Manacles]

Does signing a petition actually have weight any more?
If there is money to be made in selling off woodlands, then they will be sold regardless of public opinion - that kind of action from governments the 'democratised' world over has been evident time after time. As the guy in the video mentions, the government do not work for the people. There is no accountablity built to the systems.
Yea, a petition and some activism might well appear to stall a matter for the short term, but surely the bloated, inefficient, corrupt and self-serving government is the real issue here, not whether that goverment is making another catastrophic error or not...

I will sign the petition, as saying nothing lets them get away with thinking that what they are doing is the right thing.

I have alot of opinion on this so shall stop here!

i think signing a petition does, if for no other reason than our Government have a specific website for the populace to place petiitions along with a claim that those the exceed 100,000 signautres will be examined.

I've got a lot of (what sound like similar) views to you on government and ploicy etc but, BCUK ain't the place to discuss it

 

[slowworm]

As regards access being likely to be affected in the future, I would simply say that it is well worth checking out some of the country activity orientated organisations, many of whom are raising concerns at rumours that land access may well be curtialed to some degree in the future.

Surely that could happen regardless of any land being sold off? If anything that sounds like a reason to sell off some of the FC land, if ownership is transferred to community groups as in the original plans then they could actually increase access.

I don't suppose anyone has a link to any details of proposed curtailment of people's access do they?

As for the current review, the Forestry Panel is chaired by an ambassador for the WWF and it's members include the heads of the National Trust, Ramblers Association, RSPB, Woodland Trust and the Wildlife Trusts; the main criticism I would make is it doesn't seem to have a representative for small woodland owners/workers.

 

[Manacles]

Surely that could happen regardless of any land being sold off? If anything that sounds like a reason to sell off some of the FC land, if ownership is transferred to community groups as in the original plans then they could actually increase access.

I don't suppose anyone has a link to any details of proposed curtailment of people's access do they?

As for the current review, the Forestry Panel is chaired by an ambassador for the WWF and it's members include the heads of the National Trust, Ramblers Association, RSPB, Woodland Trust and the Wildlife Trusts; the main criticism I would make is it doesn't seem to have a representative for small woodland owners/workers.

It could well happen, you're right. If, FC land is transferred to community groups it may increase access, however it is relatively unusual for community gropus to be able to buy land in this way, for example there was a recent case in Somerset where a community raised funds to buy a woodland and prevent it being used as building land - they simply were not able to raise enough funds in the short timescale given.

Additionally one of the main means of a community purchasing land is through the use of grants which, due to the current financial situation, are currently severely restricted.

Interesting that you mention Ramblers Association and Wildlife Trusts as trustees of the Forestry Panel as they have both raised concenrs over land access relatively recently (not just with woodland areas)

Agree on your point re small woodland owners/workers with whom I would have thought the protection and longevity of our woodlands might be well placed as smaller woodland owners tend towards working in a more traditional and sustainable way

 

[Androo]

Indeed, much like they have 'designated protest areas' in London town... what is it gonna take...ay?

Yea, I agree, not the place to get all bee-bonetted about this sort of thing. If we're ever around the same fire one day we can exchange views Manacles.

Back on topic - they can keep their grubby mitts of the land that owns us!


I must leave this thread. Thanks for the heads up Shambling Shaman.

 

[It's my Ireland]

I am part of a group trying to raise the funds to buy some of this woodland though in princple it should held in trust for future generations, I just don't trust our government or any government for that matter, we need to buy it back off them so someone decent and responsible can look after it.

 

[Manacles]

Indeed, much like they have 'designated protest areas' in London town... what is it gonna take...ay?

Yea, I agree, not the place to get all bee-bonetted about this sort of thing. If we're ever around the same fire one day we can exchange views Manacles.

Back on topic - they can keep their grubby mitts of the land that owns us!


I must leave this thread. Thanks for the heads up Shambling Shaman.

Hi Androo, yes it would be nice to talk over all the issues not appropriat efor BCUK - we clearly have similar thinking. All the best