buying sssi wood

[austino]

Hi

New to your forum but realy pleased to be here. I have been looking to purchase a wood in Sussex, Kent, Essex area and have viewed most available. Found one for sale and am/was really excited until I looked into the meaning of SSSi covenant. Having read the list of cannots if this is real I would be pushing the boundarys by even walking on it and certainly couldn't take a dog.Am I correct, all the ambitions of building a log shed, camping with the kids, log fires, work hut etc are not allowed or have I (as is often the case) got it wrong.Are there any forum members with experience in these matters.I am not in anyway looking to abuse any wood I purhase, and understand the need for conservation but if I have read the rules correctly I cant even retrieve fallen dead wood without permission. I would be realy grateful for any feedback as I have no understanding in this matter. Cheers

[James M]

Hi, it's like buying a listed building - you can't even paint it without permission. I checked specifically that there were no restrictions like that on our wood before we bought.

I wouldn't touch it if it were me.

Rgds.

[tracy]

Hi Austino, welcome. We have an article coming soon on the benefits of owning a SSSI woodland, I hope to get it very soon for you to look at.

In this months newsletter - there is an article about an event in Combwell woodland. This woodland is SSSI and the owners are enjoying extra benefits because of it.

As you know, designations are there to protect the woodland (often a specific plant/ moss/ gill etc) and if you are planning on continuing to protect it, then I would suggest it would be fine . Once you meet with and talk to FC and Natural England in the woodland I think you would find a lot of support to do good for the land and it is more positive in person that what we see on paper.

Every woodland is different and that is the same with SSSI.

[austino]

Wow, two replys seemingly directly opposed. Thanks both of you and maybe its just a view point on the issue. However really important I get it right because for me its a huge amount of money and would be gutted if our hopes and desires were tangled in rules. Any others out there with sssi covenants on there woods, and if so are they enjoying the fun things like tree houses for the kids, woodfire cooking, log storage shed, recovering wood and camping etc My proposed wood is in east Sussex any others out there can help. I know i'm new to the forum but look forweard to any others members experience.

[James M]

It's down to what you want - when I buy something I want as much freedom and control over it as possible and to be left alone without having to check with someone who doesn't own it what I can and can't do every two minutes.

Just having a non SSSI wood brings enough red tape.

[Exeldama]

Got to agree with James. Freedom. Our world is full of constraints i can hardly breathe sometimes... i wouldnt personally touch an ssi with a barge pole. Assuming you are well intentioned and a reasonable person your less likely to do damage than the bucket full of burecrats whose contribution to our woods is often from behind a desk.

Sorry im not sure i made my view clear enough...ahhummm.

[Catweazle]

There is a lot of bull talked about SSSIs. My woods is part of a large SSSI, as is a lot of woodland, and it's been no problem at all. In fact I asked Natural England to re-classify my section as a separate unit in order for it to be downgraded from unfavourable-recovering to unfavourable-unchanged. This means that it attracts extra funding.

You need to look carefully at the purpose of the woodland. My wood is commercial, it is 95% Sweet Chestnut coppice that has been overstood for many years. Natural Englands primary aim for the wood is to get it back into active rotation, into commercial use again, and they will fall over themselves to help. They know that many species have evolved to thrive in rotated coppice, and that the best thing for these species is to help me make some money from the woods.

I have had no problem at all in getting permission to clear two 30m clearings, build large woodsheds ( no concrete foundations, though ), clear an access road, widen the tracks for tractor sized vehicles, remove Sycamore, fell a dangerous veteran Hornbeam, practice archery and shooting, build a charcoal burner to make better use of brash, build a pond etc etc.

They even put me onto a scheme to pay 80% of standard costs for a 200m grade A track, capable of taking an articulated lorry, from the road into the middle of the woods.

They've told me that when I can show them I'm making a proper go of it they'll consider letting me build a tool / tractor store building too.

All in all I've found them very helpful, because what they want is exactly what I want, a wood that pays. If your ambitions are very different to theirs then you may have problems, but I've found them to be very reasonable.

[Catweazle]

I just remembered, Prickly Nut Wood, where Ben Law built the house featured on Grand Designs;

http://www.earthcentrenetwork.org.uk/members/UKECN/member064.html

is an SSSI. Perhaps a good illustration on how flexible NE can be if you are working for the long term good of the woods.

[Exeldama]

Exactly. If it fits the intentions of a desk bound peron then its ok... but there may well be times when people own thier woods for simple enjoyment, biodiversity alone and dont wish to make any money... with that in mind i still wouldnt touch an SSI. Why be constrained whn their are woods out their that allow greater freedom.. if i were you i would bide your time and look to the future feeling a little less controlled.

Ben Law was/is a rare exception..a good one but he had to fight extremley hard for a long time to get his way. My own dad took 22 years to beat the burecrats and local interference...yet he has bought a derelict wood back to life through damn hard work and his hard earned pennies.

[austino]

I am trying to understand the huge difference in opinions.On the face of it lots of members out there see the sssi as bureacracy maybe even killjoys.However some, with sssi covenanted land see it almost as positive.Therefore, maybe, it is not as negative as it would appear and the fear of their mission statements is unfounded as they are only there to control people abusing the land.Has a member out there maybe owning sssi affected woodland had negative input and found as suggested the paperwork and controls stiffling.Is there an owner who lives the woodland dream on sssi land ie tree houses. log fires, wood shed, work hut etc.Does as my previous sentence suggest that an sssi covenant make one feel that it is they and not you that own the land and that your an annoying badly behaved lodger.

I am sorry to bleet on like this (particularly as a new member), but this could be the biggest woodland misunderstanding going.As a prospective buyer I am grateful, but very nervous, of negative feedback, and am comforted by positive feedback as the wood in question is possibly the best i've seen in virtualy all respects.With very divided views on this issue the other point is how saleable would it be should I have to, as clearly there are at least 50% who wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.

I have read each posting with great interest and look forward to many more. Thanks