What really is the outlook for farmland values? EE-I-HIGH-OR-LOW?

dopester

ninky wrote: »

sorry but didn't we have parks etc before the 2000. which specific areas of land did this act give access to that we didn't have access to before? and by access what to you actually mean? there's a big difference between being able to use a footpath and being able to roam on land, forage, camp etc.

How far back do you want to go back for an answer to why it became harder to have the freedom to roam and forage? Before the Agricultural Revolution you could roam where you wanted - there was no human concept of land ownership.

For tens of thousands of generations, there was no civilisation. There was no written language. There appear to have been few settled communities, none larger than a village. Wandering bands of 50 or fewer, working a couple of hours a day. There was no concept of ownership of land. A climatic change was the impetus for farming. Global warming. Over 5,000 years, the warming of the earth made it impossible for humans in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere to support themselves by hunting large animals. Forests of evergreens and beech trees began to take over the grassy plains that had once supported the vast herds upon which humans had depended upon food. Our ancestors turned to gathering wild grasses, like barley and wheat, because it was the only way they could survive.

About 400 generations ago (about 6000 B.C.) they began planting seeds and became farmers. Farming was the most sweeping innovation in human existence. Farming spawned government, civilisation, history, war, writing and organised religion on a large scale, among other things. Farming required planning ahead. It made calendars and time-telling important. It was a revolution that spread through the whole of life.

As farming grew in importance, and farm populations expanded, they inevitably pushed hunter-gatherer groups aside. After the ready supply of good land had been occupied in any region, the land itself became an economic resource as it never had been to foragers. Farmers had to work much harder than foragers ever did - upto 35 hours a week to prepare the fields and harvest the crops in the Northern Hemisphere. This required the development of private property in land. No one would work all year to raise a crop if someone else could wander by and freely harvest it. In order to grow food surpluses, someone had to have the right to exclude others from the produce of the field.

The difficulty of securing property claims played a major role in raising the scale of human communities. Farming produced a food surplus upon which nonfarmers could survive. It therefore gave a tremendous added incentive to employ and organise the use of force. An agreement among a handful of families to reserve the produce of a field was likely to mean nothing to outsiders who came around to plunder after the harvest. Farming made government possible, and, indeed necessary as the scale of human society rose.

Full recap here:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=22020275&postcount=93

neverdespairgirl

If you go to outer Mongolia, something like 98% of all the land there is freely available. You can camp, forage, do as you like.

As I have done, in fact (-:

Really2

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

If you go to outer Mongolia, something like 98% of all the land there is freely available. You can camp, forage, do as you like.

As I have done, in fact (-:

If you end up in the south though you might end up a bit hungry and thirsty.

lostinrates

fc123 wrote: »

Gosh.....well I never knew that.

Shame LIR's not around as she'd know more about why farms/land have held their prices........but she'd dead busy sorting the farm she just bought.;)

I don't have time!

I do have a keep put sign, and frankly like Ninky hate it. I have also been busy asking my new naighbours to help themselves to the contents of my hedgerows atm. MY keep out sign is here for legal reasons this time (I have used them in the past to help stop animals being fed haribo too.). We have two slurry lagoons: people/dogs etc would drown or be methaned to death. We are deaing with it. Incidenty we have lookied into apturing the methane and while ecologically it works out not so bad (I think better than pv?) its ruddy expensive.

where we are now has recently increased public access. Three ''country parks'' which exxentially here means accessible common or farmed land. One on the site of a recently abandoned business (industrial not farming). Also of course rural roads are diferent to suburban/city ones and are delightful to walk down often with great views (or dngerous and closed in.).

I'd be very happy some of the year to allow greater access to land. The problems are insurance. Insurance, insurance and insurance. Add to that the risk of setting precident for access when it is less desirable (times of year things are being harvested, giving birth or the ground is vulnerable to damage _ even human walkers with no dogs cn ruin some ground longterm) and also stupidity/thoughtlessness by users.

''Our'' new road is host to lots of cyclists, including lots of families who cycle together. I love that, it seems so social and healthy. We are the only people on this road, so its nice to see signs of life. We also have lots of paragliding and kite fliers in the area, who use the most well known o the local ''country parks''. There is fantastic foot path an byway network here: which is super.

When people don't want people crossing land IMO there is likely to be a reason other than pure ''king of the castle'' I think.

edit: farms holding prices? I haven't had net for a while so haven't been looking as comprhensively. My guess from press/gossip is its variable. I expect more falls in some times of farms, holds rises in others. Partly types of farming/diversity options and partly size. Big farms ARE needed for big money, I agree with Gen's mates. Or niche. ATM I'm not trying to make money but have landed £40 a week for that effort. The cost for that is an extra £548 per year insurance but no labour/other costs...yet.

What I'd like to see for health of nation/farming econimy and welfare (which I find imposiible to dismiss from my own considerations) are different to what would make most money. Its hard to get a whole industry to think that way.....and DEFRA would implode.

edit: IMO the horsey crowd going bust will impact the most on the price of farm houses. Also notable now is that you can't just bulid a bungalow for mum and an when they retire to let you take over the farm. Our farm was once one farm, then was five, then three then two, within a century. Now the bulk of land is sold of to big land owner (a huge problem for the future, in land prices, and supplies and diversity of land management etc. Lots of scary things with the conglomorate type farms) with the other a dairy farm and then us. Its been carved in shapes that lead to detriment when looking and land management. Shape of land holding is suprisingly important depending on use.

neverdespairgirl

Really2 wrote: »

If you end up in the south though you might end up a bit hungry and thirsty.

We did end up in the Gobi. With 6 x 50l water bags, GPS, and lots of spare bits to fix the machina.

fc123

lostinrates wrote: »

I don't have time!

I do have a keep put sign, and frankly like Ninky hate it. I have also been busy asking my new naighbours to help themselves to the contents of my hedgerows atm. MY keep out sign is here for legal reasons this time (I have used them in the past to help stop animals being fed haribo too.). We have two slurry lagoons: people/dogs etc would drown or be methaned to death. We are deaing with it. Incidenty we have lookied into apturing the methane and while ecologically it works out not so bad (I think better than pv?) its ruddy expensive.

where we are now has recently increased public access. Three ''country parks'' which exxentially here means accessible common or farmed land. One on the site of a recently abandoned business (industrial not farming). Also of course rural roads are diferent to suburban/city ones and are delightful to walk down often with great views (or dngerous and closed in.).

I'd be very happy some of the year to allow greater access to land. The problems are insurance. Insurance, insurance and insurance. Add to that the risk of setting precident for access when it is less desirable (times of year things are being harvested, giving birth or the ground is vulnerable to damage _ even human walkers with no dogs cn ruin some ground longterm) and also stupidity/thoughtlessness by users.

''Our'' new road is host to lots of cyclists, including lots of families who cycle together. I love that, it seems so social and healthy. We are the only people on this road, so its nice to see signs of life. We also have lots of paragliding and kite fliers in the area, who use the most well known o the local ''country parks''. There is fantastic foot path an byway network here: which is super.

When people don't want people crossing land IMO there is likely to be a reason other than pure ''king of the castle'' I think.

edit: farms holding prices? I haven't had net for a while so haven't been looking as comprhensively. My guess from press/gossip is its variable. I expect more falls in some times of farms, holds rises in others. Partly types of farming/diversity options and partly size. Big farms ARE needed for big money, I agree with Gen's mates. Or niche. ATM I'm not trying to make money but have landed £40 a week for that effort. The cost for that is an extra £548 per year insurance but no labour/other costs...yet.

What I'd like to see for health of nation/farming econimy and welfare (which I find imposiible to dismiss from my own considerations) are different to what would make most money. Its hard to get a whole industry to think that way.....and DEFRA would implode.

edit: IMO the horsey crowd going bust will impact the most on the price of farm houses. Also notable now is that you can't just bulid a bungalow for mum and an when they retire to let you take over the farm. Our farm was once one farm, then was five, then three then two, within a century. Now the bulk of land is sold of to big land owner (a huge problem for the future, in land prices, and supplies and diversity of land management etc. Lots of scary things with the conglomorate type farms) with the other a dairy farm and then us. Its been carved in shapes that lead to detriment when looking and land management. Shape of land holding is suprisingly important depending on use.

:hello::hello::hello:Yay!!!! Glad it's all going well.....sounds like lot's of work (re troughs etc other thread). Even better that you had time to write the above esp the bit about 'Keep out' signs.