|
Under Part 1 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act
local authorities have until February 2008, to
prepare a core path plan for their area. How
should those involved in the management of rural
areas react to the core path planning process?
Guy Wedderburn has been the manager of Callendar
Estate in Falkirk since 1992 and outlines the
approach adopted by the Estate in negotiations
with Falkirk Council.
Callendar Estate is typical of many rural
properties close to our towns and cities with a
lot of public access taking place on a largely
informal basis bringing with it the usual
problems associated with unmanaged access of
petty vandalism, litter dropping, disturbance to
stock as well as more significant problems of
fly tipping and arson. With the emerging land
reform legislation the Estate felt it was better
to take a strategic approach to the development
of access on its property. Working closely with
Falkirk Council, a series of community
consultation events took place to establish the
needs of local people. The information gathered
through this consultation process was then
discussed with the various farm tenants, which
enabled the Estate to respond proactively to the
Council with proposals for a path network which
met local needs but at the same time respected
the concerns of the farming tenants and other
Estate interests. Through this process a path
network has emerged that makes the most of
woodland tracks and generally avoids crossing
open farmland when the potential for conflict is
greatest.
Has this approach worked? At the start of the
exercise there were fewer than 5 kilometres of
recognised paths crossing the Estate. There are
now 40 kilometres of managed paths mainly
concentrated on the urban edge. Through proper
design of entrance points and by routing paths
away from sensitive farming areas the incidence
of disturbance to farm stock has reduced whilst
a service level agreement with Falkirk Council
means that problems such as litter dropping are
dealt with more speedily.
|
|
The serious problems of fly tipping and arson
have also diminished significantly as the Estate
has found that increased levels of legitimate
use have acted as a deterrent to those intent on
illegal activities. It would be wrong to suggest
that all problems have been resolved however
there is now a much better working relationship
with Falkirk Council and a greater commitment on
both sides to work towards solutions as and when
problems arise.
Falkirk Council has welcomed this approach.
Martin Nunn, the Council’s countryside access
officer commented that “the working relationship
that has developed between the Council and the
Estate is excellent. It serves as a model for
how land managers and local authorities can work
together for the mutual benefit of all,
integrating farm and woodland management with
the responsible access needs of local
communities and visitors.”
The Estate adopted a strategic approach to the
development of access over its land, and whilst
this may not be appropriate in every situation
it does mean that the core path plan, as and
when it emerges, will contain few surprises.
Guy Wedderburn BLE MRICS
Director
|
|
|
While there have been many articles in various
publications concerning the tax treatment of the
Single Farm Payment, it should not be overlooked
that the former Livestock Quotas may still be of
use to some clients from a Capital Gains Tax
point of view.
Anyone who had purchased livestock quota (as
opposed to having quota allocated at nil cost)
can claim the cost of that quota as a loss for
Capital Gains Tax purposes. This loss should be
claimed in the 2005 Tax Return.
As an example, someone who had purchased £20,000
of livestock quota during the scheme years and
was fortunate enough to have made a gain on a
sale of shares earlier this |
|
year could potentially save £8,000 in capital
gains tax.
Even if there are no gains for the loss to be
offset against this year, the loss can be
carried forward for utilisation in future years.
David Robertson
Associate Director
 |
|
