This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Yo all,
I have recently installed a lovely log burner and after 1 winter of buying my own hardwood I am going to try and be more resourceful this year. I have already cleared and processed a whole pile of discarded ash and cherry which had been dumped on a country lane near me. Satisfying and free.
So here's the question. I live near a lovely ancient woodland - Stapleford Woods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stapleford_Woods which is a mixture of ancient broadleaf (lots of birch), some pine plantation and newer sycamore. There is also some considerable rhododendrum growth. Ive done some reseach and it seem that this timber is considered quite a good firewood which doesnt require long term seasoning. As this is an invasive species which is suffocating some of the woodland (someone has tried to clear it in the past but it has returned) what are the legalities of me pulling up at the side of the road, where most of it lives, taking out a saw and getting myself some free logs - some are quite a thickness - and kindling? Perhaps I could get some sycamore as well which is considered invasive but with fewer ecologically damaging effects.
OK, my small efforts really arent going to make an ecological difference but it certainly wont do any harm either.
What do you think?
Richard
I have recently installed a lovely log burner and after 1 winter of buying my own hardwood I am going to try and be more resourceful this year. I have already cleared and processed a whole pile of discarded ash and cherry which had been dumped on a country lane near me. Satisfying and free.
So here's the question. I live near a lovely ancient woodland - Stapleford Woods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stapleford_Woods which is a mixture of ancient broadleaf (lots of birch), some pine plantation and newer sycamore. There is also some considerable rhododendrum growth. Ive done some reseach and it seem that this timber is considered quite a good firewood which doesnt require long term seasoning. As this is an invasive species which is suffocating some of the woodland (someone has tried to clear it in the past but it has returned) what are the legalities of me pulling up at the side of the road, where most of it lives, taking out a saw and getting myself some free logs - some are quite a thickness - and kindling? Perhaps I could get some sycamore as well which is considered invasive but with fewer ecologically damaging effects.
OK, my small efforts really arent going to make an ecological difference but it certainly wont do any harm either.
What do you think?
Richard
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Having been roundly bollocked by a gamekeeper in Scotland for innocently taking dead wood from a forest to use as kindling (he said the wood is left as shelter for game birds) I would certainly get permission from the landowner first.
Having been roundly bollocked by a gamekeeper in Scotland for innocently taking dead wood from a forest to use as kindling (he said the wood is left as shelter for game birds) I would certainly get permission from the landowner first.
In reply to Rigid Raider:
Is the Forestry Commission merely the caretaker rather than the landowner?
> Having been roundly bollocked by a gamekeeper in Scotland for innocently taking dead wood from a forest to use as kindling (he said the wood is left as shelter for game birds) I would certainly get permission from the landowner first.
Is the Forestry Commission merely the caretaker rather than the landowner?
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Definitely speak to the land owner/land manager first. People down my way have been reported to the police lately for collecting dead wood/wood piles from National Trust land.
Definitely speak to the land owner/land manager first. People down my way have been reported to the police lately for collecting dead wood/wood piles from National Trust land.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
could be either. However even if not the landowner I would expect the landowner would have delegated that sort of thing to them anyway.
Contact them and see what they say.
Alternately if you volunteer for various conservation charities chances are they will not be overly fussed if when some stuff is being cut back you end up with some in the boot of the car.
> Is the Forestry Commission merely the caretaker rather than the landowner?
could be either. However even if not the landowner I would expect the landowner would have delegated that sort of thing to them anyway.
Contact them and see what they say.
Alternately if you volunteer for various conservation charities chances are they will not be overly fussed if when some stuff is being cut back you end up with some in the boot of the car.
1
In reply to timjones: Why do you think this is a troll? Just because you don't understand the post doesn't mean it isn't genuine.
4
1
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Amber Valley is generally choked by rhododendrons, could kill two birds with one stone.
No match for crag id:2140
Amber Valley is generally choked by rhododendrons, could kill two birds with one stone.
No match for crag id:2140
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Ah, just noticed my spelling error in the title. I'll correct myself before the spelling police come along
Ah, just noticed my spelling error in the title. I'll correct myself before the spelling police come along
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
regardless of the environmental pros and cons, lost of habitat from all the fungi and critters that love rotten wood etc.. the owner(in this case) will say no simply due to liability if you have an accident.
Better to find a farmer etc who has some wind blown trees etc and offer to sort them out for free. Presuming you know what you are doing of course.
regardless of the environmental pros and cons, lost of habitat from all the fungi and critters that love rotten wood etc.. the owner(in this case) will say no simply due to liability if you have an accident.
Better to find a farmer etc who has some wind blown trees etc and offer to sort them out for free. Presuming you know what you are doing of course.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
If they're not yours, they're someone else's. I would imagine that if they're someone else's and you cut them without permission then that is criminal damage, and that if you remove them from the site without permission then that is theft. Although the waters muddy if its a species the land owner has a legal obligation to control.
So talk to the land owner! Perhaps they'll embrace the offer of removing them, perhaps not. Better to be told "No" in advance than to have the fuzz turning up after the fact.
Just cutting rhodadendrum away doesn't clear the infestation (more drastic, chemical measures are needed) and for all I know (or don't know) cutting it back may just encourage more growth? Plenty more here http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpg017.pdf/$FILE/fcpg017.pdf
I think it's vile stuff, but I'd be wary of just taking a saw to someone else's wood. Even if they are in principle happy to see the menace go, there are all sorts of reasons (liability, encouraging other people to help themselves to other wood etc) they might not want you to.
I think that theft of wood from private land is going to become an increasingly prominent issue with the rise in fuel costs and the rise in popularity of wood burners.
If they're not yours, they're someone else's. I would imagine that if they're someone else's and you cut them without permission then that is criminal damage, and that if you remove them from the site without permission then that is theft. Although the waters muddy if its a species the land owner has a legal obligation to control.
So talk to the land owner! Perhaps they'll embrace the offer of removing them, perhaps not. Better to be told "No" in advance than to have the fuzz turning up after the fact.
Just cutting rhodadendrum away doesn't clear the infestation (more drastic, chemical measures are needed) and for all I know (or don't know) cutting it back may just encourage more growth? Plenty more here http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpg017.pdf/$FILE/fcpg017.pdf
I think it's vile stuff, but I'd be wary of just taking a saw to someone else's wood. Even if they are in principle happy to see the menace go, there are all sorts of reasons (liability, encouraging other people to help themselves to other wood etc) they might not want you to.
I think that theft of wood from private land is going to become an increasingly prominent issue with the rise in fuel costs and the rise in popularity of wood burners.
Post edited at 10:28
In reply to wintertree:
Completely agree. I think it's already started to be honest.
> I think that theft of wood from private land is going to become an increasingly prominent issue with the rise in fuel costs and the rise in popularity of wood burners.
Completely agree. I think it's already started to be honest.
In reply to Frank the Husky:
I am sure that I understand the post but it appears to be asking whether theft is OK. Does anyone really need to ask the question? Of course you can't just rock up with a saw and fell whatever wood you fancy.
I am sure that I understand the post but it appears to be asking whether theft is OK. Does anyone really need to ask the question? Of course you can't just rock up with a saw and fell whatever wood you fancy.
2
In reply to NottsRich:
I agree with this too which is why I was looking for better sources and rhododendron wood almost seems like the perfect solution. Its good firewood and is menace to our landscape if it's uncontrolled.
I think I'll get on the blower to the FC as I most certainly don't want to encourage others to take native healthy wood nor to l want to have my collar grabbed.
I agree with this too which is why I was looking for better sources and rhododendron wood almost seems like the perfect solution. Its good firewood and is menace to our landscape if it's uncontrolled.
I think I'll get on the blower to the FC as I most certainly don't want to encourage others to take native healthy wood nor to l want to have my collar grabbed.
In reply to timjones:
Wind your neck in, man. I was asking about the legalities of removing invasive species from the roadside not lopping the Major Oak from Sherwood Forest because I genuinely didn't know. I now.understand better the situation such is the value of asking questions and will act accordingly.
Jeez!
> I am sure that I understand the post but it appears to be asking whether theft is OK. Does anyone really need to ask the question? Of course you can't just rock up with a saw and fell whatever wood you fancy.
Wind your neck in, man. I was asking about the legalities of removing invasive species from the roadside not lopping the Major Oak from Sherwood Forest because I genuinely didn't know. I now.understand better the situation such is the value of asking questions and will act accordingly.
Jeez!
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
I've just checked and as it happens it would not be permitted because they can't police what is being taken.
Oh well.
I've just checked and as it happens it would not be permitted because they can't police what is being taken.
Oh well.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
That's bad luck, because, possibly to the surprise of some of the more uppity/opinionated posters on here, if you lived anywhere near Blacka Moor in Sheffield, the local Wildlife Trust positively encourages the taking Rhododendrum which has been sawn up.
That's bad luck, because, possibly to the surprise of some of the more uppity/opinionated posters on here, if you lived anywhere near Blacka Moor in Sheffield, the local Wildlife Trust positively encourages the taking Rhododendrum which has been sawn up.
Post edited at 11:26
1
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Maybe you need to wind your neck instead?
It's hardly unreasonable to query whether someone asking if it is OK to make land management decisions on behalf of someone else is trolling!
> Wind your neck in, man. I was asking about the legalities of removing invasive species from the roadside not lopping the Major Oak from Sherwood Forest because I genuinely didn't know. I now.understand better the situation such is the value of asking questions and will act accordingly.
> Jeez!
Maybe you need to wind your neck instead?
It's hardly unreasonable to query whether someone asking if it is OK to make land management decisions on behalf of someone else is trolling!
2
1
In reply to Timmd:
Transferring waste to someone without a waste carrier's licence? Dodgy one that, if someone takes some away and then decides they don't want it and fly tip it, the trust could be liable.....
> he local Wildlife Trust positively encourages the taking Rhododendrum which has been sawn up.
Transferring waste to someone without a waste carrier's licence? Dodgy one that, if someone takes some away and then decides they don't want it and fly tip it, the trust could be liable.....
In reply to Timmd:
An agreement to take pre-sawn wood is rather different to people assuming that they can wade in and fell anything that they believe shouldn't be there.
> That's bad luck, because, possibly to the surprise of some of the more uppity/opinionated posters on here, if you lived anywhere near Blacka Moor in Sheffield, the local Wildlife Trust positively encourages the taking Rhododendrum which has been sawn up.
An agreement to take pre-sawn wood is rather different to people assuming that they can wade in and fell anything that they believe shouldn't be there.
Post edited at 11:41
3
In reply to Timmd:
And TBF it wasn't the Rhodendrum that made me think troll. It was the addition of Sycamore onto the list. If non-native species were fair game then we could have a field day harvesting Red Oak, Walnut, Horse Chestnut and Copper Beech off many National Trust properties.
FWIW my take would be that Rhodedendrum needs controlling but it would take a real mug to do it for the firewood. It takes far too much work for a poor yield of decent logs if you're clearing up and dealing with the brash properly. If you're not clearing up well then most landowners will soon lose patience with you. We can all find plenty of people to do a poor job and leg it as soon as they have a decent pile of logs in the shed but we prefer to work with those who do the job well.
And TBF it wasn't the Rhodendrum that made me think troll. It was the addition of Sycamore onto the list. If non-native species were fair game then we could have a field day harvesting Red Oak, Walnut, Horse Chestnut and Copper Beech off many National Trust properties.
FWIW my take would be that Rhodedendrum needs controlling but it would take a real mug to do it for the firewood. It takes far too much work for a poor yield of decent logs if you're clearing up and dealing with the brash properly. If you're not clearing up well then most landowners will soon lose patience with you. We can all find plenty of people to do a poor job and leg it as soon as they have a decent pile of logs in the shed but we prefer to work with those who do the job well.
Post edited at 12:16
In reply to timjones:
I don't blame you, that'd be my feeling. I understand they are quite handy for wildlife & bugs etc, piles of logs with the brash weighed down underneath.
I don't blame you, that'd be my feeling. I understand they are quite handy for wildlife & bugs etc, piles of logs with the brash weighed down underneath.
In reply to felt:
Where can you help yourself to Copper Beech?
> You can help yourself to the copper beech.
Where can you help yourself to Copper Beech?
In reply to Timmd:
I have 2 mental lists. Those who have had firewood off us in the past and those who are welcome to come back.
The first list is long but there are only 2 people on the second list ;(
I have 2 mental lists. Those who have had firewood off us in the past and those who are welcome to come back.
The first list is long but there are only 2 people on the second list ;(
In reply to felt:
If you have the one out of my garden you'll be a stain on the countryside
> Wherever you like. It's a stain on our countryside.
If you have the one out of my garden you'll be a stain on the countryside
In reply to timjones:
I'd love to be able to get a time lapse video of a habitat pile gradually decomposing, with close ups of the bugs and animals doing their thing as it changes.
I'd love to be able to get a time lapse video of a habitat pile gradually decomposing, with close ups of the bugs and animals doing their thing as it changes.
In reply to Timmd:
An appealing thought. I suspect it would take me a lifetime to master the technology and timings required to achieve it.
And I'm more than likely over half a lifetime late in considering starting it
> I'd love to be able to get a time lapse video of a habitat pile gradually decomposing, with close ups of the bugs and animals doing their thing as it changes.
An appealing thought. I suspect it would take me a lifetime to master the technology and timings required to achieve it.
And I'm more than likely over half a lifetime late in considering starting it
In reply to timjones:
.
What were their special qualities out of interest? The clearing up brash?
.
> The first list is long but there are only 2 people on the second list ;(
What were their special qualities out of interest? The clearing up brash?
In reply to timjones:
Thanks for the warning, I'll take it down in minute sections so you don't notice it going.
Thanks for the warning, I'll take it down in minute sections so you don't notice it going.
1
In reply to MG:
Easy to get on with and does a good job.
One of the biggest offenders agreed to do all the work and extract the logs themselves and then demanded that I provide a trailer and and tow vehicle smack in the middle of lambing.
> .
> What were their special qualities out of interest? The clearing up brash?
Easy to get on with and does a good job.
One of the biggest offenders agreed to do all the work and extract the logs themselves and then demanded that I provide a trailer and and tow vehicle smack in the middle of lambing.
In reply to MG:
Oh and the occasional apple pie left on the doorstep
> .
> What were their special qualities out of interest? The clearing up brash?
Oh and the occasional apple pie left on the doorstep
1
In reply to malk:
Don't burn Leylandii unless you're happy to see the flying sparks to set set fire to your carpet
> felt prefers leylandii- no really..
Don't burn Leylandii unless you're happy to see the flying sparks to set set fire to your carpet
In reply to felt:
If you want to avoid the dogs giving your presence away you'll have to whittle it away with a very small penknife
> Thanks for the warning, I'll take it down in minute sections so you don't notice it going.
If you want to avoid the dogs giving your presence away you'll have to whittle it away with a very small penknife
In reply to malk:
I used to like them as much as the next hugger, and then your that there Mr Alan Mitchell poisoned my mind.
> indeed. similarly by a veteran copper beech..
I used to like them as much as the next hugger, and then your that there Mr Alan Mitchell poisoned my mind.
In reply to timjones:
agree with this as I have worked for dartmoor NPA in the past clearing rhodo. We had to burn the brash or lift off the ground to stop it re-rooting, and had to spray the stumps for many years after. Hard work. How about J knotweed as biofuel?
Will
agree with this as I have worked for dartmoor NPA in the past clearing rhodo. We had to burn the brash or lift off the ground to stop it re-rooting, and had to spray the stumps for many years after. Hard work. How about J knotweed as biofuel?
Will
In reply to timjones:
Discretely cutting some Rhodies from woodland for fuel is simply not a serious issue: they are fast growing invasive plants. I'd argue reporing such would be wasting police time. To call it theft or land management by proxy is daftly disproportionate. It did make me smile when imagining two cons chatting in jail: I'm in for armed robbery what about you?
Discretely cutting some Rhodies from woodland for fuel is simply not a serious issue: they are fast growing invasive plants. I'd argue reporing such would be wasting police time. To call it theft or land management by proxy is daftly disproportionate. It did make me smile when imagining two cons chatting in jail: I'm in for armed robbery what about you?
2
In reply to wintertree:
Is it waste?
It could be argued that the rhododendron are being grown for dual purpose. Especially if people are actually using it as firewood.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6...
> Transferring waste to someone without a waste carrier's licence? Dodgy one that, if someone takes some away and then decides they don't want it and fly tip it, the trust could be liable.....
Is it waste?
It could be argued that the rhododendron are being grown for dual purpose. Especially if people are actually using it as firewood.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6...
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Remember, forgiveness is often easier to get than permission.
For good firewood try walking around a mature stand of beech trees, they tend to shed plenty of branches. Just take a saw and a big rucksack!
Remember, forgiveness is often easier to get than permission.
For good firewood try walking around a mature stand of beech trees, they tend to shed plenty of branches. Just take a saw and a big rucksack!
In reply to Offwidth:
As I explained earlier it was the addition of Sycamore into the equation that left me wondering if the OP was fishing for a reaction.
As i also mentioned if you're taking Rhodedendron for firewood you're either a mug or doing a poor job. You tend to need to revisit the site several times over a few days to ensure that the brash is properly burnt.
> Discretely cutting some Rhodies from woodland for fuel is simply not a serious issue: they are fast growing invasive plants. I'd argue reporing such would be wasting police time. To call it theft or land management by proxy is daftly disproportionate. It did make me smile when imagining two cons chatting in jail: I'm in for armed robbery what about you?
As I explained earlier it was the addition of Sycamore into the equation that left me wondering if the OP was fishing for a reaction.
As i also mentioned if you're taking Rhodedendron for firewood you're either a mug or doing a poor job. You tend to need to revisit the site several times over a few days to ensure that the brash is properly burnt.
In reply to Baron Weasel:
It's easy to ask for either!
If you weren't going to be given permission you aren't likely to get forgiveness, you will merely have caused offence.
> Remember, forgiveness is often easier to get than permission.
It's easy to ask for either!
If you weren't going to be given permission you aren't likely to get forgiveness, you will merely have caused offence.
In reply to timjones:
I wasn't talking about clearance. I was thinking about going for the trunks of the largest plants, cutting from the base and taking the trunks. This wasn't to rid the wood of the pests because that would be impossible but it would damage a few large specimens and I would get a boot full of good timber.
On the subject of sycamore, the wood has been removing these recently to help the oak and birch (as has Sherwood Forest) which is the only reason it was suggested. Either way the forestry commission said no so no need to get your knickers in a twist any more.
> As I explained earlier it was the addition of Sycamore into the equation that left me wondering if the OP was fishing for a reaction.
> As i also mentioned if you're taking Rhodedendron for firewood you're either a mug or doing a poor job. You tend to need to revisit the site several times over a few days to ensure that the brash is properly burnt.
I wasn't talking about clearance. I was thinking about going for the trunks of the largest plants, cutting from the base and taking the trunks. This wasn't to rid the wood of the pests because that would be impossible but it would damage a few large specimens and I would get a boot full of good timber.
On the subject of sycamore, the wood has been removing these recently to help the oak and birch (as has Sherwood Forest) which is the only reason it was suggested. Either way the forestry commission said no so no need to get your knickers in a twist any more.
Post edited at 10:58
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
For crying out loud, would you have accepted any answer other than " yes it will be fine"
If you can't handle an ongoing discussion then don't ask questions
For crying out loud, would you have accepted any answer other than " yes it will be fine"
If you can't handle an ongoing discussion then don't ask questions
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
You can't just cherry pick the best bits of firewood and leave a mess. Thankfully it's been almost 30 years since I last had to do any Rhododendron clearance but the brief was to thoroughly burn all the brash.
> I wasn't talking about clearance. I was thinking about going for the trunks of the largest plants, cutting from the base and taking the trunks. This wasn't to rid the wood of the pests because that would be impossible but it would damage a few large specimens and I would get a boot full of good timber.
You can't just cherry pick the best bits of firewood and leave a mess. Thankfully it's been almost 30 years since I last had to do any Rhododendron clearance but the brief was to thoroughly burn all the brash.
In reply to timjones:
the stupid thing about clearing rhodo is that it was probably commonplace in the UK before the last ice age. Can I add that there is only one thing worse than taking non-native wood from a forest and that is dumping your garden waste (bulbs, shrub clippings) into a wood thinking it will compost (happens a lot near me)
the stupid thing about clearing rhodo is that it was probably commonplace in the UK before the last ice age. Can I add that there is only one thing worse than taking non-native wood from a forest and that is dumping your garden waste (bulbs, shrub clippings) into a wood thinking it will compost (happens a lot near me)
In reply to wiwwim:
Surely there can't be any harm in leaving a few bags of grass clippings on top of the brash from the Rhododendron firewood that you have just harvested
> the stupid thing about clearing rhodo is that it was probably commonplace in the UK before the last ice age. Can I add that there is only one thing worse than taking non-native wood from a forest and that is dumping your garden waste (bulbs, shrub clippings) into a wood thinking it will compost (happens a lot near me)
Surely there can't be any harm in leaving a few bags of grass clippings on top of the brash from the Rhododendron firewood that you have just harvested
In reply to timjones:
I don't know why you're having such a hiss. I asked what I thought was a sensible question because I didn't know the answer, I evaluated the responses, took appropriate action and the outcome is that the wood will stay the same and I won't get arrested. What's more, I spoke to the commission, found out when they have working parties and will volunteer my time.
If you don't like what you think are stupid questions then stop responding to them.
I don't know why you're having such a hiss. I asked what I thought was a sensible question because I didn't know the answer, I evaluated the responses, took appropriate action and the outcome is that the wood will stay the same and I won't get arrested. What's more, I spoke to the commission, found out when they have working parties and will volunteer my time.
If you don't like what you think are stupid questions then stop responding to them.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
I queried whether or not it wasa genuine question before answering. Since then I've offered answers and engaged in debate with some other posters.
In return for this you offer snide comments and then accuse me of having a "hiss"!
Pot calling kettle?
> I don't know why you're having such a hiss. I asked what I thought was a sensible question because I didn't know the answer, I evaluated the responses, took appropriate action and the outcome is that the wood will stay the same and I won't get arrested. What's more, I spoke to the commission, found out when they have working parties and will volunteer my time.
> If you don't like what you think are stupid questions then stop responding to them.
I queried whether or not it wasa genuine question before answering. Since then I've offered answers and engaged in debate with some other posters.
In return for this you offer snide comments and then accuse me of having a "hiss"!
Pot calling kettle?
In reply to DancingOnRock:
There are most definitely stupid questions
Taken at face value the OP looked a tad suspect, but it was apparently an error of judgement to attempt to highlight that suspicion in a lighthearted manner
> There are no stupid questions.
> Only stupid answers.
There are most definitely stupid questions
Taken at face value the OP looked a tad suspect, but it was apparently an error of judgement to attempt to highlight that suspicion in a lighthearted manner
In reply to timjones:
Whatever. I think you need to re read your responses. I'll let others judge.
Bad attitude dude.
Anyway I got what I needed.
Over and out.
Whatever. I think you need to re read your responses. I'll let others judge.
Bad attitude dude.
Anyway I got what I needed.
Over and out.
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Fri Night Vid Le Toit de Ben - Quebec 1958
This week's Friday Night Video whisks us back to Val-David, Quebec, in the Autumn of 1958. Two daring young climbers embark on the ascent of a route that seemed unattainable, resembling a roof suspended in the air, defying all the conventions of the time....
3 May
Loading Notifications...