In message
>,
Buxqi > writes
>>
>> I have planted trees because I enjoy doing so. They will not be
>> harvested in my lifetime. There is a perception that a sapling belongs
>> to the person who caused the planting. However, at 100mm that sapling
>> undergoes a transition and falls under the control of others who had no
>> interest or input for the previous 20 or so years.
>
>Has the legislation disuaded you from planting any trees that you
>otherwise would have planted?

Umm... I find that difficult to answer.

Recent moves to steer the CAP away from production support and towards
beneficial rural land management make planting decisions less easy. My
children have no interest in taking over this farm so there is no long
term financial benefit to unaided planting. Immature woodland, with no
sporting income, might be seen as a negative asset.

Aided planting has ties which might interfere with unforeseen changes in
agricultural land use.

I have not yet joined the *entry level* tier of environmental payments
simply because annual hedge trimming is forbidden and the agreement is
locked for 5 years. Anyone putting marginal arable land into low input
production might seriously regret the doubling of cereal and pulse
prices over the last 12 months.

I will continue to plant trees where they are unlikely to cause me
problems, on land not suitable for cropping. Sometimes this may
discourage an inappropriate use such as highway verge parking or access
for fly tipping:-)

regards

--
Tim Lamb