Small Woodland Owners' Group

Narky locals.

Paperwork, grants, legal issues

Postby Exeldama » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:42 pm

Someone needs to own it. otherwise no-one will take responsibility for it. My wood is a point in case , its part of a larger area and lots of walkers/locals etc have over the years used it but as far as i can tell not one of them has put anything back into it. Not money, time or thought.


When people take ownership rather than just title they are more inclined to invest further..arnt they.?


The alternative is just to ignore evrything, which in the long term will allow nature to do what it likes. This may be good on the whole or not, depends entirely on your perspective.


Rhododendron ousting others, sycamre doing its own thing and diseases possibly hammering natives. Things would change but not go away, new species evolve perhaps. Squirrles that can build log cabins. Winged badgers pursuing aboreal worms whom in turn seek to bore into the flesh of a small apelike creature living amongst the branches of ever spreading invasive species of tree. There would have been a time when these hopping furry midgets ancestors would have been recognised as nearly human..............liberals.!


Exeldama
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 4:04 pm

Postby jillybean » Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:59 pm

Ooo err! Too many Lord of the Rings sci fi imaginings there for me. Still I can see you have a point Ex.


jillybean
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:35 pm

Postby greyman » Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:05 pm

I nearly made a similar point but fought I might be just imagininin the refrences - Could almost have come from the opening lines from 'The Many Coloured Land' by Julien May.


greyman
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:09 pm

Postby wood troll » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:24 pm

Hey grayman,

did'nt the wierd stuff start after they went back through the portal into the pliocene era... the start of the book was just your normal aliens using tissues! ;-)

wood troll


wood troll
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:00 pm

Postby greyman » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:28 pm

Er, I thought there was the bit with the hominid like aminules ( Ramapithecus) trying on the torc's when they came across the flying machines of the Tanu.....but I think we might be accused of going oft piste here - although I am sure they had very interesting tree type things going on in the Pliocene age


If by any chance anyone else has the faintest interest in what wood troll and I are on about have a look here:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saga_of_Pliocene_Exile


Bit sad as I've just been to see if I could find my copy of the Many Coloured Land and I've only got the others - and I think the first one may be out of print. Any road up - back to the 21st century and putting ones mark on the land....hand me that steak and mullet!


Greyman


greyman
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:09 pm

Postby jennysmate » Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:27 pm

Exeldama makes a good point. Ownership brings responsibilty.

James M, I'm interested to know why you bought your wood, if you believe that you dont own it and give away the rights to anyone? Why not just save your money and do whatever you do in the wood anyway?


jennysmate
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:07 pm

Postby wood troll » Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:51 pm

Hey Grayman (still off topic)

I had a look at "The many coloured land" and you are right about it starting with the 'other' aliens and the Ramapithecus. There are 57 used copies for sale on Amazon, though I do have all 8 books of the series! (I'll shut up now).

wood troll


wood troll
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:00 pm

Postby greyman » Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:48 pm

Tempted, very tempted.....will save my pennies from the feastive season!


Greyman


greyman
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:09 pm

Postby Stephen1 » Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:00 pm

Hi James M


I just wanted to add my agreement to what you've said. Ownership is a very complex philosophical issue when it comes to land. Personally I think the public should have both more rights but more responsibilities/duties to go hand in hand with those rights - but I accept the massive problems with that....


I think realistically unless it's kids causing damage, or lighting fires, you're almost always better off accepting that you just can't fence the world out. It's also worth bearing in mind that it's almost inevitable the public will be given rights of access to woodland at some point in the future - similar to those bestowed under the CROW act. How much more difficult will it be dealing with individuals you've had injunctions taken out against - to prevent their trespass that was causing no more harm than an affront to your wish for privacy?


It's difficult - I don't pretend I have the right answer, but it would be a tragedy if you let a bit of what you perceived as trespass against YOUR property spoil your enjoyment of the woodland you work with. I've seen this happen to people - they just let a minor problem of a mouthy dog walker or two get completely out of hand, so that it eats at them all the time - and takes away most of the pleasure they could have had enjoying the woodland.


Stephen1
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 8:12 am

Postby Darren » Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:39 am

If the public do get the right to roam. I going to have to re evaluate what is left in the woods. I've a tipi, caravan mini tractor, chipper and other tools and not mention the Forest school kept there equipment over there. It's going to make life harder for us if we can't leave things behind.


Darren
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:26 pm

PreviousNext

Return to All things legal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron