I can't believe I m even responding to this utter drivel...
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Nice one, Jack; get a joint-venture with Disney and we can have the Royal Disneyland Experience (hosted by the various Royals; there's enough to go round). Turn the palaces and grounds into 5-star hotels and theme parks, and the estates into wildlife havens...... We can then sell access to this countryside to the Proles we've just dispossessed in the forest sell-off, as a Royal Centre-Parks and then we'll be quids-in...Jack Harrison wrote: Bit of real estate there that could also raise a few quid - Balmoral, Windsor, Buck House.
Jack
Jack's favourite politician!Felix wrote:... and Tony Blair.
The Crown owns the Crown Jewels and the Crown Estate. The Crown effectively embodies our nation's governance and power and thus is the ultimate guarantor of all property rights within the nation, including its own (until such time as we surrender sovereignty to faceless bureaucrats overseas).Jack Harrison wrote:The crux of the matter is who owns the Crown Jewels, Royal Palaces, etc.
It's at times like this that I would prefer to cut parliament out of the loop and be ruled directly by the crown. At least the House of Windsor is stuffed with conservationists.padfield wrote: The Crown owns the Crown Jewels and the Crown Estate. The Crown effectively embodies our nation's governance and power and thus is the ultimate guarantor of all property rights within the nation, including its own (until such time as we surrender sovereignty to faceless bureaucrats overseas).
Guy
Make that three:Rogerdodge wrote:As far as I can tell, there are two sites on the net to sign petitions to Save Our Forests.
http://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/en/camp ... T.mc_id=fc
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/save ... s#petition
As an aside, this makes me laugh a little. It wasn't so long ago that the FC were persona non grata regarding thier treatment of Alice Holt and damage to the rides while extracting the 200 year old oaks for commercial timber. Re-reading the posts of the time one would be forgiven for thinking that a great deal of people would have welcomed less FC involvement in this particular woodland! How times change...Jack Harrison wrote:But I heard an TV item that mentioned Rendlesham, Rockingham and Alice Holt as being on the government’s “for sale” short list. The latter two in particular are superb butterfly forests.
Jack
padfield wrote:That's very helpful Felix - thank you.
If "no longer at risk" = potentially isolated in a sea of commercially minded non-environmentally managed woodlands, then I guess they will be "safe", for now! Of course, the government will employ a host of inspectors to ensure that environmental standards are met, won't it?Felix wrote:
Once I have this figure I can subtract the % that will in all liklihood be acquired by conservation organisations and therefore no longer at risk (probably even better protected than under current FC stewardship).
Felix.
And of course an army of Elf’n’Safety Inspectors will be needed to carry out a risk assessment before an overhanging branch is chopped off. Meanwhile a 401 will be posted on the access path.Of course, the government will employ a host of inspectors to ensure that environmental standards are met, won't it?
Agreed, but this is not provided by the FC currently, except in 'heritage woodlands' that shall be safe, we are lead to believe.NickB wrote:But as we all agree it is landscape-scale management that is the long-term solution,
and later says:...and I couldn't care less about public access.
So do you mean that you couldn't care less whether or not there is public access or do you mean that you are confident that public access will be retained?Jack: Your comment does not help my quest - as I said I have no concern for public access.