The Accidental Smallholder Forum
Community => Coffee Lounge => Topic started by: knightquest on January 23, 2011, 11:39:57 pm
-
I heard on the radio today that the Government are going to sell off all of the forest areas in England. It could raise 370 million pounds....................anyone else able to corroborate this story or not?
If they are, what can we do to stop em?
Ian
-
Oh yes, it's true.
Here ya go http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/save-our-forests (http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/save-our-forests)
-
I heard that too, it was on TV when I woke up but did not take much notice, I suppose they are areas that do not create money just create expense, I love Forests and woodland and it would be a disaster to sell them off to private owners....there will be some depressed people if it happens, me for one, wonder if the same applies to Scotland.
-
And if it does I'll be buying some
-
Even if they sell of all the forrests to private owners, you still have the right to use them
http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/outdoors-responsibly/your-access-rights/ (http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/outdoors-responsibly/your-access-rights/)
This info only applies for Scotland, but I'm sure it's a similar set up in England & Wales too.
HTH
Karen
-
This lot really don't seem to want to be voted in again next time... ::) what else can they cut?! what else can the increase prices on? child benefit cuts, DLA cuts, selling off the forests, petrol hikes...it affects most of the population in one way or another people will vote with their feet.
anyway, didn't want to sidetrack the topic thread there but I can't help feeling what next?!
-
It wouldn't matter who was in power these cuts have to be done - if it wasn't the ones you mention it would be something else. The recession is deepening.
-
This government IS making some major cuts that others defiantly would not, why?
Well I think they are being very positive, their aime as I see it is to clear out all the people on low, moderate incomes by causing major depression, leading to illness and early death. If the goal is to get the country out of recession well they are on the way to making it elitist, only the rich will benifit!
People will not be able to achieve any simple goals, like own their own house, have their children go to university to become layers :chook:,(Lawyers) Dr's, Vets, etc, they will not be able to have holidays,buy an odd luxury, walk freely in local forests (we used to have to pay for parking where we lived before!) cuts in jobs so more out of work with NO income to speak of, those in rented property will be forced to move to smaller, lower rental ghettos where crime WILL flourish, Social care cuts so more family breakdowns, I spent some time in disable children's care and was very fortunate to have a good budget and provide respite services to several families that I know were cut when I left, not due to me but the budget, those families I know would have had to put their children into residential care at a much greater cost where the care may not always be ideal, basic food too expensive so our diets will be more rubbish, cannot afford to travel to look for work as the travel costs, car, rail, bus and even bike, will be too big a percentage of the wage....so, as I said, only the very rich will benefit, I could go on and on. We are both very happy with a very small income BUT, life is going to get harder and harder due to the cuts and even I am getting depressed, my stress relief is the Forest, if I have to pay to go there I'm B%$^"%^ed!!!!!!!!
-
That's how I feel Sandy. The child benefit issue, we are literally a couple of pounds a year in the bracket that means we will lose our benefit, HOWEVER if Tony works a day less a week we will be equally as well off as he will earn under that bracket and we get to have daddy home a bit more (yay!) so a day's work equates to a weeks benefit (unless our sums are well out!)
my mum who lives with us and is wheelchair bound with MS could have her DLA cut, that means not being able to afford a carer to help her wash and put her to bed (only an hour a day but it means so much to us) so guess who'll have to do that on top of my 4 children and smallholding and soap business? yep. me. that's my health and stress levels up the spout.
no way we can afford to put 4 girls through uni in the years to come and can't just do one as that's not fair.
and then all the area's of natural beauty where we go to enjoy family time and unwind will be turned into goodness knows what!
I know that no government is perfect but these cuts are too much too quickly surely :-\
-
I have a few issues about money this morning anyway, I am not at all political but I do think this governemnt will create more depression in everyone except the very rich, more crime, more drug and alcohol use and more cases of mental breakdown. I had a not too bad income but now I have a not too good one, another sad issue is people will work until they drop, pensions will be less and not paid out until people are too old to have decent prospets of enjoying them. I certainly know the value of respite care for people, I also know how important it is to think your wage will help you enjoy life, not sure where all these jobs will come from either, companies are dropping like stones!!!! I am also sure all of us smallholders will be getting rid of stock, that will be sad as I know how much stress relief is envolevd with looking after animals!!!!
My issue is, I do not want loads of money or benifits, I just want what I earn to be mine to enjoy.
-
is there anything that could be done to stop them selling off the forests?? petitions?? or something??
-
:( Off to Devilla to cheer myself up as its a very sad day for me :(
-
faith - there is a facebook group which I believe has links to petitions etc if you are on FB.
sandy, sorry to hear you are having a bad day :(
-
thanks yes i am on facebook will have a look :wave:
-
here it is
http://www.facebook.com/home.php# (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#)!/pages/Save-Britains-Forests/157828020924281
-
The reason the current government and Labour if they remained in power have to make these cut is due to Gordon Brown's economic Policy of borrow borrow borrow and oops lets borrow so more, that and fueling a deregulated banking sector to take Huge risks with investors money, OK you blame him completely but he played a large part.
If anyone is to blame it is Labour, by overspending and throwing away billions of pounds and gambling that the boom times would back fill the debt they were creating.
There was a program on just before Christmas regarding the countries national debt, bear in mind that this is not the same as the current budget deficit. Several top ranking MPs were asked what the countries debt was, not one of them got the figure right, some said 60bn, 80bn, or 180bn. and the last person was Alan Johnson the former Labour Shadow Chancellor.
All of the MP's thought that the budget deficit was the national debt, these are 2 very different things, the actual debt to the country as stated in the programme is roughly 4 trillion pounds. You could consider the current budget deficit as a short term loan, once we have paid that back everyone will still have to pay back 4 trillion.
The interest paid on the national debt each year amounts to more money then the current deficit, and we are all paying every year! and never getting rid of it.
getting back to the point, selling off the nations forests will make no real dent in the national debt at all, however if they are sold to people who are committed to keeping them in good condition and in tune with nature then I see no problem with selling some of it but perhaps not all of it.
I hope I have not made you all depressed.
Hopefully the onset of spring should give us all a smile
-
The reason the current government and Labour if they remained in power have to make these cut is due to Gordon Brown's economic Policy of borrow borrow borrow and oops lets borrow so more, that and fueling a deregulated banking sector to take Huge risks with investors money, OK you blame him completely but he played a large part.
If anyone is to blame it is Labour, by overspending and throwing away billions of pounds and gambling that the boom times would back fill the debt they were creating.
There was a program on just before Christmas regarding the countries national debt, bear in mind that this is not the same as the current budget deficit. Several top ranking MPs were asked what the countries debt was, not one of them got the figure right, some said 60bn, 80bn, or 180bn. and the last person was Alan Johnson the former Labour Shadow Chancellor.
All of the MP's thought that the budget deficit was the national debt, these are 2 very different things, the actual debt to the country as stated in the programme is roughly 4 trillion pounds. You could consider the current budget deficit as a short term loan, once we have paid that back everyone will still have to pay back 4 trillion.
The interest paid on the national debt each year amounts to more money then the current deficit, and we are all paying every year! and never getting rid of it.
getting back to the point, selling off the nations forests will make no real dent in the national debt at all, however if they are sold to people who are committed to keeping them in good condition and in tune with nature then I see no problem with selling some of it but perhaps not all of it.
I hope I have not made you all depressed.
Hopefully the onset of spring should give us all a smile
This is exactly what I said earlier. - the present Government have GOT to make these cuts to pull us back up on our feet. OK it's going to be hard for some, but hopefully the malingerers will be weeded out too. I'm just glad I'm on a pension now and not having to wait a great many more years for it.
-
unfortunately for me and My OH were just at the beginning of the whole process of buying our first home and in some years to come hopefully Raise a family. its only going to get harder, which is why I am trying to be as self sufficient as possible, as much as our situation allows anyway.
Alot of people do not realised that the current cuts are only to pay back the deficit and not the actual debt, think of what cuts would have to be made if they wanted to even start paying back just 1p of the current national debt.
-
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/save-our-forests#petition (http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/save-our-forests#petition)
A link so you can sign a petition :wave:
-
That's the petition signed. It makes me so angry.................it was bad enough that we gave all our gold away. It seems now that we want to give our natural resources away too >:( >:(
I suppose it would be better if they were gifted to say the National Trust. At least they might look after them.
I also understand that we have to cut back but forests???
Need to calm down a little..............
Ian
-
I know I havnt been in Uk for some time, but don't a lot of the forests belong to the crown? Is it these they are talking about selling?
-
One think to remember is, most of the forests are barren conifer plantations like Thetford forest planted on ancient heathland (or Breckland locally) It really depends on what controls are in place to protect native ancient woodlands and mixed deciduous trees. If a conservation group where to buy a conifer plantation and turn it into a mixed woodland habitat I'm all for it. We should be more concerned with the loss of heath and wetlands rather than a few conifers.
-
I think part of th problem in the UK is we want Scandanavian style public services while paying US taxes. Doesn't work. We look too much to the States and follow where they lead - perhaps we should look more to our Scananavian neighbours. I think if Scotland was independent, that would happen as we are naturally more socialist (with a small s) than England. Maybe 'cos we were oppressed for so long.
-
Its clear to see that those with big bucks will have choices and people on incomes they can pay thier way on will have non. The fact is, if forests, woodlands are sold off there will not be many purchasers who have others or the woodland and wildlife in mind but a means of linning thier own pockets, in life most people with loads of money are ruthless (sorry all you richer ones) they will do what will bring the best return, woodlands are expensive to look after, I too love the idea of wildlife groups buying and maintaining them, seen programmes where organisations have brought up land etc, nice idea IF it works, money talks......no money...no power!!!
-
If woodlands are managed properly they pay for their own keep. If I could find a few acres of woodland within a few miles I would invest in it - I have the wherewithall and am getting damn all from the Bank for it. I would fence it properly, perhaps have beehives, and harvest just enough to pay for any upkeep. It can be done. I'd be able to run my very fast dogs in a safe and interesting area. I am not rich, just have money left over from a good couple of house sales.
-
Up keep of woodland is expensive, if you let people use the woodland and they trip on wire etc, they sue you and your insurance goes up. Jusst ennquire how much to fell 1 tree, in Devilla forsest loads of trees are falling, the forestry has loads to do in there, pluss the pot holes to fill in!, fences to keep repairing as well as forestry management! My home I had when married backed onto woodland that was poorly kept, its now nearly all gone due to poor woodland management, not all trees live forever and you need to plant in the correct proportion to maintain a good balance, my brother belonged to the forestry preservation in Northants and its more complex than it seems, far toooo ecpensive unless you keep them to yourself and that is the argument/ I love Forests
-
if you let people use the woodland
As a landowner you can't stop people from coming onto your land (unless you can prove it is dangerous for them, or detrimental to crops)
Have a look at the outdoor access code for more info
http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/outdoors-responsibly/your-access-rights/ (http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/outdoors-responsibly/your-access-rights/)
-
And if it does I'll be buying some
there's one for sale up here, Annie
Norman Wood, Fife - Nearly 8½ acres, £39,000
Glenduckie, Newburgh, Fife
An appealing mixed conifer and broadleaf woodland surrounded by forest, open fields and hilltops.
-
It's been sold according to woodlands.co.uk I did look at it before and it's about an hour from me. I only drive 20 minutes to community woodlands just now that are deer fenced all the way round - 200 acres of fun for my dogs. But thanks, anyway, Kerstin.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/8287080/Forest-sell-off-could-leave-heritage-sites-in-hands-of-supermarkets-and-sleazy-bankers.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/8287080/Forest-sell-off-could-leave-heritage-sites-in-hands-of-supermarkets-and-sleazy-bankers.html)
More news, not encouraging for the individuals who may hope to buy and manage a patch of woodland for themselves i'm afraid.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12377215 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12377215)
More news ...... lots of public protest but no U turn.
-
my "MP" voted for it, despite my complaint ::) :&>
-
I think the forestry issue is vote loser which doesn't even save a lof of money, if any. Hopefully the govt is flying a kite and will reel it back in.
I see the essence of the economic problem in house prices. My mother bought a flat for £100k and sold it for £240k ten years later. This is a 9% compound return, way higher than interest rates were. If the property had merely kept pace with inflation it would have been worth perhaps £140k and therefore considerably more affordable. If the person who then bought it borrowed 90% of the "value", that is £215k, then they're borrowing a lot more than than an affordable value, encouraged by a stupid and greedy banking system (and a stupid and sleepy regulator.
We need house prices to fall to give our kids a chance, but the banks can't let that happend cos they can't afford the losses and the govt won't let it happen because kicking people out of houses is bad for them too. In Germany most people rent because tenants are heavily protected. House prices don't rise, so people don't buy them and tenant protection means they don't want to buy them so prices don't rise. Here rising prices mean prosperity...
A mess.
-
just found this news article
Sales of 15% of England's publicly-owned forests are to be put on hold while the criteria for selling them off are re-examined, the Government said. Skip related content
Related photos / videos Forest sales delayed amid review Enlarge photo The move follows widespread criticism of proposals by ministers to offload the remaining 85% of England's public forest estate to timber companies, charities and local communities.
The proposed sales of 15% of the forests announced in last year's spending review will not go ahead until a review aimed at "significantly" strengthening the protections given to the woodlands is completed, Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said.
The sale of 15% of the forest estate - the maximum the Government can sell under current legislation - aimed to raise £100 million towards the Environment Department's budget.
But Ms Spelman said the Government was committed to increasing protection for access and public benefit in public woodlands, and that the "inadequate measures" applied to sales under the previous administration would be reviewed.
She said the review would not affect the commitment to sell 15% of the forest estate over the next four years, and had no impact on the continuing consultation into the remaining 85% of the public forests.
The Government's consultation, which provoked a storm of protest when it was published last month, outlines plans to offload England's 258,000-hectare public forest estate, currently managed by the Forestry Commission, over the next 10 years.
The proposals include a £250 million sale of leaseholds for commercially valuable forests to timber companies, measures to allow communities, charities and even local authorities to buy or lease woods, and plans to transfer well-known "heritage" woods such as the New Forest into the hands of charities.
The statement relates only to the 15% of English publicly-owned woodlands already earmarked for sale.
Ms Spelman said: "In light of the Government commitment to increase protection for access and public benefit in our woodlands, the criteria for these sales will be reviewed so that protections are significantly strengthened following the inadequate measures that were applied to sales under the previous administration. Pending this review, no individual woodland site will be put on the market."