thinking of going "offgrid"

[British Red]

No there isn't. Whether a group or an individual owns a piece of land, it is in private hands.

We were discussing the meaning of the term "The Land Is Ours"

No, we were discussing "going offgrid". You brought up a political body that seeks to seize authority over other peoples property. This site has a no politics rule and that group are a patently political lobby who want "something for nothing". I would be happy to repudiate their foolishness but lets both respect the sites no politics rule and return to the topic in hand and not indulge in political statement making.

 

[Ivan...]

Traditionally in this country " An Englishmans home is his castle" Which to my mind means, even if you live in a terrace or on an estate, what we consider we own needs to be confined by a fence, hedge, boundary etc, and who we let in to that space is down to us and we will guard it fiercely.

If one is lucky enough to own a space suitable for self suffiency or even better to live off grid, a great proportion of the members on here would love to give it a go, but as most of us don't have the means to own their own little piece of heaven, it will only ever be a dream.

But i am working on it!

Ivan...

 

[hobbes]

You brought up a political body that seeks to seize authority over other peoples property. This site has a no politics rule and that group are a patently political lobby who want "something for nothing". I would be happy to repudiate their foolishness but lets both respect the sites no politics rule and return to the topic in hand and not indulge in political statement making.

Why the vehemency? I brought up the organisation because it helps people with planning issues if they want to live on land that they own. Since the OP specifically mentions this, I thought it might be useful. I'm really sorry I bothered.

 

[British Red]

The reaction is because many people find the notion of a group that attempts to put squatters rights above property owners rights and assist others in breaking and circumventing the law to be nauseating.

 

[hobbes]

The reaction is because many people find the notion of a group that attempts to put squatters rights above property owners rights and assist others in breaking and circumventing the law to be nauseating.

That's your take on what they do. I suggest that anyone interested read the website, specifically the Chapter 7 one that this all started from, and make up their own mind.

I find all sorts of things nauseating. I don't get vehement with people for talking about them.

If you feel I was breaking the no politics rule, fine, point it out. You don't need to come down like a ton of bricks because you happen to disagree with me.

 

[Minotaur]

http://www.permaculture.co.uk/articles/how-get-planning-permission-non-development-land

This is interesting especially the DIY Farm/Smallholding bit. I am trying to find the website of an author who has written a book about the subject. Basically you buy land apply for barn, and that gets you a caravan/mobile home for 5 years at which point you have to have a business that supports you ie you need to prove you are making enough to live off and need to live on the land. One of the things he recommends is a caravan site.

Now if you have a barn so you can have showers etc and charge people £10 a night to camp and can get 60 nights a month for 7 months. You are earning £20,000 a year.

However this only works if you have 5 hectares which is over 12 acres. Got two links - http://www.green-shopping.co.uk/grounds-for-hope-ways-to-live-legally-on-cheap-land-in-the-uk.html & http://www.fieldtofarm.com/

Is it just me or could BushcraftUK get this which would could make things interesting for their members - http://www.naturalengland.gov.uk/ourwork/regulation/campingandcaravan/campingcertificates.aspx

http://www.campingandcaravanningclub.co.uk/ukcampsites/smallsites/setting-up-a-certificated-site/

 

[boatman]

In this discussion there seems to be a tacit agreement that throwing enough money at the right people will get you planning consent. In the UK to try this would be a very short route to prison. We have had planning scandals but the vast majority of planning people are not corruptible. Stupid to keep implying that they are.

Community land ownership in Scotland seems very dubious to me. Just because you live somewhere why should you, through your community, win the lottery by taking control of a chunk of land belonging to somebody else? Converting leasehold to freehold of your actual house or flat is something different.

 

[Uilleachan]

In this discussion there seems to be a tacit agreement that throwing enough money at the right people will get you planning consent. In the UK to try this would be a very short route to prison. We have had planning scandals but the vast majority of planning people are not corruptible. Stupid to keep implying that they are.

Community land ownership in Scotland seems very dubious to me. Just because you live somewhere why should you, through your community, win the lottery by taking control of a chunk of land belonging to somebody else? Converting leasehold to freehold of your actual house or flat is something different.

In general I'd agree with you, but at risk of getting political, (NB I'm making every effort to not do so) I'd tender both Eigg & Assynt as being two places that were in need of legislative intervention of some kind, after all this is the 21st century not the 1740's or 1860's.

Some would argue that it was a political fudge, a quick fix, well, it worked for both Eigg and Assynt. I guess what we need is some proper land reform, that way this kind of legislation would be necessary, in scotland.

 

[British Red]

If communities want to buy land, they club together and offer the highest price - simple, no legislation needed. If they aren't the highest bidder, they don't get the land - also simple - its called "the free market".

 

[boatman]

Agree with Red that buying on the open market is what a community should do.

 

[rik_uk3]

Buying as a 'community' brings the inherent problems that arise from decision making by committee.

 

[BlueTrain]

Like I said earlier, in this thread or another, some people seem to view "going off the grid" as kind of a political statement. During the counter-culture back-to-the-land movement in the U.S. about 40 years ago, it was a very conscious thing but not necessarily with the same mindset of today. Likewise, there seems to be a mood of breaking away from society, too, for some reason.

Community ownership of land, either the way the Hutterites have managed to do it or perhaps like religious (monastic) communities have done for ages, is actually quite rare and coincidentally, all the examples I can think of have a religious connection. But it doesn't imply going off the grid (or the deep end, either). The Amish and Mennonites in this country have never been on the grid, officially, anyway, yet they do not have community ownership of property. They do have a lot of loopholes, however, that allow the use of modern conveniences sometimes. They can use a telephone but can't have one at home. They can have an electric milking machine but no electricity in the house.

Having electricity in the house shouldn't imply that you have to have all the electronic gadgets that are assumed. Just remember, those who already live off the grid or at least way out at the edge, aren't even reading this forum.

 

[Uilleachan]

Buying as a 'community' brings the inherent problems that arise from decision making by committee.

Living and conducting business in an absentee landlord's perceived private play park has very many more "inherent" problems for those communities.

Enclosure is a dim and distant memory in most, but not in all, of these islands. One has to have the historical context as a point of reference before trying to evaluate the pros and cons, rights and wrongs of; scottish community buyouts.

From my point of view I feel public ownership (local authority) would have been a much better way ahead, but we are where we are and with one or two notable exceptions I think the community buyouts, to date, have been for the public good.

 

[BlueTrain]

Regarding enclosure, I wonder if that dim memory persists among the old stock that settled in the Applachians in the late 1700s, since I suspect that many of those immigrants came from Great Britain at the time. Of course, it would have been absent in settlers from other places like Germany, who brought their own memories, which no doubt also persist, if dimly. But regarding going off the grid, it should be possible to greatly reduce one's dependence on "the grid," depending on one's circumstances. Going off the grid is a sort of anti-consumption concept as well as an independence idea. The problem is in doing it. Reading in a lot of threads in this very forum, one senses a strong consumer ethic. We want what we want, whether or not we need it. Then, too, how much independence do we want? Is it even a good idea to abandon community or am I misreading the overall feeling? And that reminds me of something and it's a little disturbing when I think about it.About a hundred years ago there appeared a goodly number of outdoor books. That was when Horace Kephart was actively writing. There were others another sixty years later, probably the most interesting being Colin Fletcher but there were others like Calvin Rutstrum. Easily the most interesting and useful, too, was Dick Proenneke, who built his own cabin in the mountains of Alaska when he was fifty-one years old and lived there for the next 30 years. He more than any, went off the grid. Mostly they were all single men or men who basically abandoned their wives and families, although at least a couple of writers did mention bringing the family along. Perhaps that's why I've never gone very far off the grid (though some claim I'm "off"), simply because my family has me anchored. Only now my son is in California and my daugher is in Germany. The hold of the anchor is weaker.

 

[Minotaur]

Strange.
I would love to own and live on 13 acres plus of land to have a life most people only dream of. Forget politics etc imagine your best ever trip as you get up in the morning and look out at the forest around you and that is how you get up every morning. Off grid so next to no bills and your job is within walking distance as is the natural grocery store ie a garden big enough to support you. Feed a couple of animals that have a good life of no chemicals that are going to end up in the freezer.
I have a friend who loves his job he gets up in the morning with a smile on his face. He talks about work with that same smile on his face. That is not a political statement it is a quest for a better life.

 

[BlueTrain]

We don't all have the same dreams, naturally, and unfortunately, my wife wouldn't tolerate mine. But it doesn't stop me from dreaming (and I dream of lots of things). Some things I'm not too sure about, however. In any event, it may or may not be a better life' it's just going to be different.

I know what it's like to use a wood-burning stove. It makes for a cozy kitchen in the morning, to be sure, but it's a lot of work and a lot more difficult to use than gas or electric. I had neighbors in town who still used a wood-burning kitchen range when I was little and one still kept a cow. She also had a garden. Ours was bigger and some neighbors had gardens that were bigger still and that was all in town. Provided your diet accomodates what you can grow in your own garden, you can go a long ways on what you grow yourself. But you have to can some of it to get you through the winter. While it is possible, I suppose, to freeze some of it, I don't know how you can manage a freezer "off-grid." It's awfully hard doing without electricity. It eliminates a lot of the drudgery around the house and you might need it to run the water pump.

Animals? No, thanks. Although I've known people who kept animals, either horses, chickens, hogs or cows, they keep you home. I'd rather not be tied down with an animal, not even a pet.

 

[bearbait]

Animals? No, thanks. Although I've known people who kept animals, either horses, chickens, hogs or cows, they keep you home. I'd rather not be tied down with an animal, not even a pet.

Yup - you can always trade some goods or labour for a chicken or other meat for the pot. I let a neighbour graze some of my ground with his stock, and eggs or an occasional joint of meat turn up in the porch.

 

[BlueTrain]

Trading my labor for money is basically how I make my living now. However, it is certainly possible to live more frugally than I do now without going off the edge (of the grid, that is). The first thing we'd need to do is move. Our property taxes where we live now is on the order of about $5,200 a year, which is about $100 a week. After that, we'd simply have to consume less, which sounds dumb but that's the simple way of seeing it. Commuting isn't free, so that would be a savings. Not sure if I could live where I could use wood heat.

 

[boatman]

Best deal I made was a dozen bantam eggs for a desk. We had lots of other neighbourly exchanges in our village. Not really direct trades more access to other people's surplus, next door's rhubarb and our cabbages for example.