Hands Off Hartlebury Common

Ive sat and watched this comments board with interest, and I can’t help feeling that whats going on is a fairly in balanced argument for those that have yet to make up their mind and are looking to make a decision by gaining more information. Surely leaving the comments against the petition may allow them to make the best informed decision.

Certain comments I know are very misleading, I am talking about the common not being managed for a 100 years. Because anyone with a modicum of conservation knowledge should know that a heathland is formed by grazing the land and this grazing kept the ability of trees to seed the area down, so removing the grazing increase the amount of tree cover. I point to the common across the main road into Stourport as an example where horses are still grazing the land but the amount of trees has not increased. Also given how long the common hasn’t been grazed the trees would have taken it over ages ago yet management in the form of removing saplings at an early age prevents the trees from over growing the area.

The comments about fire hazards are a little out as well given as the council for years has been doing controlled burning on the common for as long as I can remember and again anyone with knowledge of heathland knows that fire helps to regenerate an area of heathland hence the controlled burning. Just because you remove a tree doesn’t mean that the risk of fire is going to increase.

Shade and moisture control by trees is also an error in information because any moisture the trees provide in shade will be sucked up by the trees and their root systems not making it to the smaller plants, which as it happens living on a heathland will have adapted to lower availabilities of water in the soil due to how their roots systems interact with the fact that the water will drain out of the soil quite quickly.

The trees that grow specifically on the common are also non habitat specific and are invasive on the heathland. Silver Birch in particular is a major problem given how quickly it grows and spreads, apart from the fact it’s not actually a native species in Britain it is understandable why the council and many other land managers across the country wish to remove it.

Now I shall move onto the controversial area of Common Land.

“Currently, the general public have no rights to go onto common land unless the land is an urban common, or is crossed by public rights of way (and they follow the line of the right of way). However, the government's legislation in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 to permit public access to open countryside may now also include access to common land.”

This is a direct quote from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/Planning/LandAndPropertyDevelopment/DG_10026177 please go and read as Steve is suggesting for other links he is promoting.

Are also I suggest you read this document http://archive.defra.gov.uk/rural/documents/protected/common-land/common-land.pdf

which is the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) list of registered common land. If you go to page 19 and then go down 14th down you will find the common. If you then read across you will find who the registered owner according to this register is.

I hope that this response is met with some positive response from some (I’m not expecting it from some areas) and that it has given some people something to think about. I also hope that it isn’t removed for spelling or being off topic because it is spelt to the best of my ability and its wholly on the topic of the common. I must also add that I am not a council member or official but a resident of the local area and have been for nearly 20 years.

If it is removed I will simply repost for those that wish to have a read.