Ministers plan huge sell-off of Britain's forests
- Thread starter sandbender
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Instead of assuming that I'm some kind of heathen and only seeing the downside of what I'm saying,have a look at how much access we really have.What are we actually allowed to do on FC land?
If it was privatised then we could then demand something for our money,If you pay to go on private land then you can expect certain standards and facilities.At present you have no rights to anything at all on FC land.there was a time when you had no right to even be on the land and it wasn't that long ago.In the past I tried to get access to some FC land to use as a site where we could stay overnight and enjoy our hobby.I had to get insurance (£5,000,000 public liability insurance) risk assesments,emergency plans and all sorts of other things just to be able to go and do what we all like to do.After 8 months of chasing all these things up and site visits with the area manager I finally got the permission we wanted,it just had to be passed by the FC top brass who unfortunately doesn't like bushcrafters.The best she was able to offer us was 10 individual night booked 6 months in advance at a cost of £480.This is ridiculous.We cannot use theses forests as we like eventhough we have paid for them for years.I understand and abhor the fact that every day there are people who wantonly destroy foothpaths with vehicles,burn acres of woodland through carelessness or spite,leave untold tons of litter and have raucous parties in what should be a pristine environment.How often are these people caught and punished?Yet we as a nature loving community are not allowed into the woodlands to practice our hobby .We are being punished for what others outside our community are doing,it's a bit like stopping your kids eating sweets because the kid down the road has toothache.
If the woodlands are sold to private enterprise the new owners will want as much return for their outlay as possible,if this means allowing people to use the woods for bushcraft then they will allow it as long as they make some money.If the place is like a tip then people won't go there and they won't make any money.
There is a private woodland near me that also has a commercial campsite with all the facillities you could want He charges £7 per night for one part of the site and £5 for the other part.The woodland site has fresh mains water and that is it.You'd think that the part with all the facillities would cost more but you'd be wrong.He charges more (and gets it ) for the woodland site because(in his words) supply and demand ensures that his woodland site is full right through summer and you need to book in advance any other time.This is a perfect example of private woodland being more accessible to us than publically owned FC land.
The choice we have out of the above is pay for what we want to do on private land or don't do it at all because the FC won't allow it.
I hope this goes a ways to showing that I'm not the devil in disguise but just a realist.
If it was privatised then we could then demand something for our money,If you pay to go on private land then you can expect certain standards and facilities.At present you have no rights to anything at all on FC land.there was a time when you had no right to even be on the land and it wasn't that long ago.In the past I tried to get access to some FC land to use as a site where we could stay overnight and enjoy our hobby.I had to get insurance (£5,000,000 public liability insurance) risk assesments,emergency plans and all sorts of other things just to be able to go and do what we all like to do.After 8 months of chasing all these things up and site visits with the area manager I finally got the permission we wanted,it just had to be passed by the FC top brass who unfortunately doesn't like bushcrafters.The best she was able to offer us was 10 individual night booked 6 months in advance at a cost of £480.This is ridiculous.We cannot use theses forests as we like eventhough we have paid for them for years.I understand and abhor the fact that every day there are people who wantonly destroy foothpaths with vehicles,burn acres of woodland through carelessness or spite,leave untold tons of litter and have raucous parties in what should be a pristine environment.How often are these people caught and punished?Yet we as a nature loving community are not allowed into the woodlands to practice our hobby .We are being punished for what others outside our community are doing,it's a bit like stopping your kids eating sweets because the kid down the road has toothache.
If the woodlands are sold to private enterprise the new owners will want as much return for their outlay as possible,if this means allowing people to use the woods for bushcraft then they will allow it as long as they make some money.If the place is like a tip then people won't go there and they won't make any money.
There is a private woodland near me that also has a commercial campsite with all the facillities you could want He charges £7 per night for one part of the site and £5 for the other part.The woodland site has fresh mains water and that is it.You'd think that the part with all the facillities would cost more but you'd be wrong.He charges more (and gets it ) for the woodland site because(in his words) supply and demand ensures that his woodland site is full right through summer and you need to book in advance any other time.This is a perfect example of private woodland being more accessible to us than publically owned FC land.
The choice we have out of the above is pay for what we want to do on private land or don't do it at all because the FC won't allow it.
I hope this goes a ways to showing that I'm not the devil in disguise but just a realist.
I'm going there in a couple of weeks and am booked on a 'bushcraft session'. Be interesting to see what happens, but I'm guessing it won't be what we call bushcraft.
Sapper1, I think you are assuming that whoever buys this land will be bushcraft-friendly. I have my doubts. I'm sure if you asked any large corporation if you could camp on their land for a few nights with a real fire, they'd tell you where to go. Whether it's right or wrong, most people think of us a Bear Grylls wannabes who want to light fires and leave trash all over the place. We are a minority group and we have to accept that.
It's great that there are some open-minded campsite owners, but they are a very rare breed indeed. You only have to search on here for the number of threads about finding places to practice bushcraft.
It's great that there are some open-minded campsite owners, but they are a very rare breed indeed. You only have to search on here for the number of threads about finding places to practice bushcraft.
i agree ganstey, a good deal of the research will be lost but i guess it is something that your average joe will never understand or appreciate.
also your right about campsites, yes there will be more of them but they all have to adhere to health and safety so will be restrictive and therefore boring.
if you brought a woodland would you want people lighting fires in your woodland who you have never met or can trust? i know i wouldn't.
the thing that worries me most is the changing of rules about protected woodlands. im not sure but if this means that felling licences no longer apply say goodbye to many woodlands, just because they are being sold as woodland doesn't mean that will stay that way!
this is a bad thing imo.
pete
Well, I do own my own woodland, and yes I am very wary about who I let in. So I'm not being very public spirited, but I bet I am being typical. As I don't live nearby I am worried that people may take advantage of it and spoil it for me and those locals I do trust.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/co...s-plan-huge-sell-off-of-Britains-forests.html
Only just spotted this, i'm speechless.
Seriously i'm at a total loss for words...
Only just spotted this, i'm speechless.
Seriously i'm at a total loss for words...
Will the rights of access be gone when these lands pass into private ownership? I don't know very much about the English legal system but it sounds like a petition to Parliament is due big time.
Good luck and happy trails...torc.
Good luck and happy trails...torc.
Last edited:
aye, just spotted, thanks for the merge mods!
er yeah, seriously my use of [deleted expletive] has increased 10 fold.
i guess its now up to the national trust, local councils and other volunteer and charity organisations to try and snap up what they can but i can seriously see alot of this land just being levelled.
i'm horrified they want to allow the cutting of ancient woodland though, living in cheshire i understand what its like to have very little ancient woodland, granted its a picturesque farming county but otherwise we're pretty short on the ancient stuff, its all replant from the 18th and 19th century.
er yeah, seriously my use of [deleted expletive] has increased 10 fold.
i guess its now up to the national trust, local councils and other volunteer and charity organisations to try and snap up what they can but i can seriously see alot of this land just being levelled.
i'm horrified they want to allow the cutting of ancient woodland though, living in cheshire i understand what its like to have very little ancient woodland, granted its a picturesque farming county but otherwise we're pretty short on the ancient stuff, its all replant from the 18th and 19th century.
from what i have been told a few months ago from friends that work in the FC that it would more than likely be "TIL HILL" that would buy and run the whole of the commission woods and forests.....but from talking to these friends again this is no longer the case...they have been told that their will be cuts and job loses in the area of 20% but it could be must higher, and the FC its self will not be sold off.They have also been told that they need to start to turn more of a profit, which my work in the bushcraft community advantage. As for the comments about woods being sold etc this has been going on for years.In the area where i live in the last few year about 5 woods have been sold and more have been ear maked too.
Access for bushcrafting on commission land all depends on the Forester in charge of that beat/distric so one that front im sorry to say it is very hit and miss. If i find out anymore information i will post it up.
Access for bushcrafting on commission land all depends on the Forester in charge of that beat/distric so one that front im sorry to say it is very hit and miss. If i find out anymore information i will post it up.
I don't think we could rely on "caring capitalism" to provide for our bushcraft needs or the welfare of the forests either. Despite the numbers on this site, it is a minority hobby and I'm sure that private woodland owners would be far more interested in the bigger bucks to be made from exercising shooting rights with corporate hospitality groups and such like or the money to be made from timber - both more lucrative than running what would be in effect a camp site.
Also, I like the idea of our forests being in state hands. They are a public amenity and the FC is their best hope of being preserved for future generations.
Also, I like the idea of our forests being in state hands. They are a public amenity and the FC is their best hope of being preserved for future generations.
Here's a petition you can sign if you oppose the idea -
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/save-our-forests
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/save-our-forests
Done. Quite a bit of the woods I walk in (Haldon Forest) are Forestry Commission and it would be a real pest to have to start paying for them. Why not sell off some royal palaces or open up royal estates in their entirety to paying visitors or build a big travellodge style hotel near parliament for all the non-london mps (all parties) to stay in and save money that way. There are literally thousands of better ideas I'm sure on how to balance the budget.
Sorry to all if I got too political....
Sorry to all if I got too political....
Surely if shooting rights are more lucrative, and mean that the woods are undisturbed for nine out of twelve months and so completely protected during the animal and bird breeding seasons, then we, as people who want to encourage more wildlife, should agree that this is a better use of woodland?
If not, are we really saying that what we want is that taxpayers should fund out hobby, to the detriment of the ecosystems and wildlife?
Why on earth should we have taxpayer funded camping?
Red
we need more golf courses? since when? more huge grass spaces for a few rich people to have business meetings whilst everyone else is working hard...no thanks!
That makes me angry!
This, just adding to the whole Council housing, Pensions, Child Tax Benefit money thing, I can't see them lasting long...stupid.
should we be campaigning about this?
That makes me angry!
This, just adding to the whole Council housing, Pensions, Child Tax Benefit money thing, I can't see them lasting long...stupid.
should we be campaigning about this?
Should we be campaigning to remove financial incentives to add to overpopulation? Of course we should. Actually we should be campaigning for tax charges for each child above one. Right behind you on that one
I find it difficult to see this as anything other than a land-grab. Profitable forest will be sold off and probably asset-stripped. Our long-term biodiversity and economic resources will be sold to a few profit-takers who will make a few gestures towards consultation and local community involvement, while ripping out what return on investment they can. Anyone who has read Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine will recognise the methodology: manufacture a crisis, bamboozle the public, overwhelm them with change, close down the space for debate, and sell off everything and anything to a corporate cabal.
The previous administration got a lot wrong, but we have an enormous deficit because we HAD to keep the banking sector afloat. We missed the opportunity to properly regulate the sector, and are now being swept up in a manufactured crisis that serves the interests of the corporate sector at the expense of the population in general, and the most vulnerable in particular.
The previous administration got a lot wrong, but we have an enormous deficit because we HAD to keep the banking sector afloat. We missed the opportunity to properly regulate the sector, and are now being swept up in a manufactured crisis that serves the interests of the corporate sector at the expense of the population in general, and the most vulnerable in particular.
Similar threads
