Forestry Commission sell off

sussexbythesea said:
5) Maybe if private industry did not fiddle their books and do so many cash-in-hand jobs without paying tax maybe we would be in the debt we are in? Funny most of the people I know who work in the private sector have much bigger houses, second homes and a nice pot of money in the bank. They are welcome to it because their jobs are often boring and with no satisfaction of doing anything worthwhile.
Click to expand...

As a business owner teetering on the brink I think this is a most objectional bigoted comment spoken by someone who is oh so ignorant in the ways of the world.

No fat cat redundancies for us unlike some of the public sector.
 
Last edited:
i hope we can stop this -V - and glad to see so many sensible and concerned views here.

the money raised is small (compared to some unpaid big business tax (for example)

While for previous generations fighting Fascism was urgent and ethically motivated, unlike the International Brigade, The French Resistance and others, the US led invasion of Iraq (and both Gulf Wars) was orchestrated by commercial interest, lying governments, and massive abuses of Democratic Process back here in 'the west'....Saddam Hussein was encouraged by Bush Snr into a conflict with Kuwait-The US then used this as an excuse to invade the region and critical oil resources....

In the UK we are still asking "where are the WMDs Tony?"

World wide the link between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein is still being questioned.
What has been achieved in Iraq in the last decade?
Is this really a winnable war for 'democracy'......

but I digress...

lol!:forced sell -off of bankers second homes - i like that :)

or Cut Trident...


Re-rights of way on private land...

Yes rights of way are present - but it was not so long ago that public action was need to make sure they continued....several were lost during Foot n' Mouth because "they were not being used"......once land is privately owned it is easier and easier for minor rights of way to be lost forever....so specific new protection might be required, if this allowed to happen at all.

This is (IMO) a philosophical and politically motivated policy - Conservative Government seeks to reduce Governmental Public Responsibilities to an absolute minimum, regardless of consequences or long term damage.



Oh - and we could save money by not using undercover police to infiltrate non-violent environmental protest groups and deliberately provoking trouble....every little helps :)

Footnote: @Mike007 > are you the same worrying physco who was advocating trampling protesters with horses a couple of months back? shanti mike, shanti
 
ORANGEHORSE said:
There are indeed bridlepaths in forests, and they will continue to be rights of way. However, following a bridlepath that crosses from one side of a wood to the other and out onto the road again as of right, and maintained by the County Council, is not the same as having a large parking area and waymarked, circular rides (that might include the bridlepath) and can be from 5-15 miles in length and which are maintained by Forestry Commission staff.

I can see all sorts of platitudes about "mainainting access" and the new owners/managers stopping trailer parking, or increasing the cost of a permit or not maintaining the routes and gradually make it more and more difficult for horses to use the woods.

There is no benefit for a landowner to have horses crossing their land (and that includes having a bridlepath on your land too). It would be impossible to charge enough to make it economically worthwhile, so why would a private landowner want horses in the first place? Walkers do not do damage to paths and if there is a cafe they spend money there. A horse arrives in a trailer and goes home again when they are finished, riders rarely go and spend money int he cafe as they don't like leaving the horse unattended in a public parking place.

That is my objection to the sell off of the Forestry Commission, I can't see private owners wishing to put up with the bother of having horses.
Click to expand...

In what world do walkers not damage paths? :confused:
 
???

yes lets keep walkers off paths to save them from damage.

i keep my sofa wrapped in plastic...wouldn't want to damage it by sitting on it would I....duh.
 
gnomeking said:
???

yes lets keep walkers off paths to save them from damage.

i keep my sofa wrapped in plastic...wouldn't want to damage it by sitting on it would I....duh.
Click to expand...

One could view woodland as somewhere for people to walk, and tramp about as they like.

Personally, I am also aware of the many valuable species that reside in our woodland. Walking causes erosion of paths, plants can be trampled and compaction of soil can lead to root damage of things like trees. Why do you think they cordoned off the Major Oak? :rolleyes:

However the wording of your post suggests you don't care about such things.
I'm not saying ban all walkers (well.. ;) ) but to state that they cause no damage to paths or otherwise is utterly wrong.

Look at Kinder Scout, once the site of the Mass Trespass...
 
Last edited:
Fragglerock said:
As a business owner teetering on the brink I think this is a most objectional bigoted comment spoken by someone who is oh so ignorant in the ways of the world.

No fat cat redundancies for us unlike some of the public sector.
Click to expand...
sadly these clowns that "work" in the public sector havent a clue about real life Cut cut and cut and we will still be strangeld by red tape the real problem is the money we p up the wall being involved with the EU and giving fortunes in "aid" to dictators to top up swiss bank acounts or for arms to blow other tribes up Sorry Camoron is just fiddleing round the edges we need a conservative goverment ... Oh sorry where were we.... forrestry sell off im with mike007 and not the millitant trots that seemed to have sliped in here with their daft views and every thing is wrong now gordon and nu liebour arnt in spraying money we havent got about .
 
PLEASE Don't sell our forests , they are part of our heritage, our life.I like quite a few thousand others , am horse rider and in a lot of cases this is the only place we can ride in safety.Our roads are dangerous, THE HORSE WAS HERE BEFORE THE CAR BUT WE HAVE NO OR LITTLE RESPECT FROM A LOT OF ROAD USERS.
IT IS A PRIVILEGE THAT WE ARE ON THIS PLANET SO WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE TO "OWN " WHAT MOTHER EARTH GAVE NATURALLY
We don't trash the ground like motorbikes and quads do , I can't speak for everyone but we ,as horse riders are well aware of our tentative hold on life , subject to weather and the fagility of this planet,after all riding half a ton of horse with a mind of its own can be rewarding as well as hard work.we put a lot into enjoying our sport and recreation.So we try to abide to the countryside code to enjoy this .
I was riding along a quiet road a few weeks ago and a lorry wing mirror clipped my leg, There was plenty of room on the road,nothing parked the other side. I was right in the gutter, unfortunately there was no verge only a wall.luckily and i say this in all humility,my horse was absolutely astounding, she moved sideways and kept me in the saddle, I am sure she did it to help me .I was so thankful, it could have been a lot worse.she is only a youngster, have had her since a foal.I sustained a badly bruised thigh and knee.I have to ride to cannock chase about 3 miles away and then we can enjoy a lovely stress free amble and .If I lost this forest I would be then confined to the field and roads.
PLEASE KEEP OUR FORESTS FOR ALL TO ENJOY NOT JUST THE PRIVILEGED FEWW WHO WILL LOCK THEM AWAY FOR ONLY WALKERS, BIKERS AND QUADS TO USE
 
When I think of forests in the UK I think of massive conifer plantations, which is what most of them 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.
 
lazybee said:
When I think of forests in the UK I think of massive conifer plantations, which is what most of them 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.
Click to expand...

Oh my GOD. Someone with sense!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top