In article ,
BAC wrote:

Interesting discussion between you two, but I doubt the average citizen has
any idea what's in the WCA etc., nor has much/any fear of sanctions.

While I agree with that, making things illegal (or the converse!) has
a long-term effect by percolation through the people that do know.
Not always the desired effect, of course ....

Personally, I think that education of people to appreciate why they might be
doing harm taking plants would be a better long term bet than the creation
of yet more rules and regulations. Nick, of course, might think educating
people to take plants more appropriate - I would agree that if the plants in
question are 'doomed' in their existing location, there is little to be
lost, and perhaps something to be gained, by relocating them to a more
secure location where they might thrive.

Yes. I would actually put it that I believe in educating people when
and how to take plants, and most definitely when and how not to!

For example, taking a few things like ramsons, bluebells, tipped-in
blackberries or most tree seedlings is fine, but taking even one
orchid isn't.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

| Fungi are not plants: they occupy a completely separate phylum.

Tell that to a lawyer :-) God alone knows what the House of Lords
would decide that fungi are.

Expert witnesses would concur.

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

The message
from "Colin Davidson" contains these words:

Furthermore, the Act is written in such a way that it will be almost
impossible to prosecute people who take plants without permission and
for gain. I can see lots of loopholes, and there was and is no attempt
to assist enforceability.



I haven't read that bit of the act, so I'll have to take your word for that.

Well, some White Van Men who dug up (stole) boxes and boxes of snowdrops
in East Anglia got quite heavily banged by the beak recently.

If you CBA, have a search in this year's (I think, if not, the end of
last year's) Eastern Daily Press wibble: www.EDP24.co.uk

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

It is also virtually impossible to reduce a bluebell carpet to only
a few plants without removing most of the topsoil - what you CAN do
is to remove the ones of flowering size, but they also spread
vegetatively.

But they don't migrate. Dig up the parent bulb and you get the bulbules
with it.

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

The message
from "BAC" contains these words:

Are truffles 'plants'?

No.

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

The message
from "Druss" contains these words:

No, you can pick flowers and fruits of plants that aren't on the highly
protected list.

See http://www.naturenet.net/law/wcagen.html#plants

This does say that it's not part of the law rather it's part of "common law"
which is a strange beast at best. Also says you can only do this on public
land. Guess trespass would come into the picture otherwise, that and
scrumping !.

I am sure they "could" prosecute if they wished, but don't bother due to the
uproar it would cause, but until someone tries it I guess i'll never be
sure.

Trespass is a Common Law offence, and unless you commit a crime while
trespassing you cannot be prosecuted - this only applies to the criminal
law - you can only be sued. Damages for common trespass, if awarded,
generally amount to something like one penny, and the costs are usually
borne by the litigants.

However, theft, damage, poaching etc can result in the serious
(criminal) charge of Aggravated Trespass, which can result in heavy
fines, imprisonment and confiscation of any tools used in its execution
- which includes a vehicle.

As long as one is going with the intention of committing an offence, one
is committing trespass on the public highway too, so one does not have
to be caught in delicto flagrante.

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

In article ,
Anthony E Anson wrote:
The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

It is also virtually impossible to reduce a bluebell carpet to only
a few plants without removing most of the topsoil - what you CAN do
is to remove the ones of flowering size, but they also spread
vegetatively.

But they don't migrate. Dig up the parent bulb and you get the bulbules
with it.

Only if you remove a large lump of topsoil, too. If you have ever
tried to get rid of bluebells, you will know how hard it is to do.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Anthony E Anson wrote:

Trespass is a Common Law offence, and unless you commit a crime while
trespassing you cannot be prosecuted - this only applies to the criminal
law - you can only be sued. Damages for common trespass, if awarded,
generally amount to something like one penny, and the costs are usually
borne by the litigants.

That is no longer true since the infamous Criminal Justice and Public
Order Act. A policeman can turn trespass into a crime under certain
not-very-stringent conditions.

Under the "rave" section, a policeman can even turn insistence on your
legal rights with no offence or even tort involved into a crime. I
heard of one case where it was claimed that it happened, too.

However, theft, damage, poaching etc can result in the serious
(criminal) charge of Aggravated Trespass, which can result in heavy
fines, imprisonment and confiscation of any tools used in its execution
- which includes a vehicle.

Not just those. Several other things, which are not themselves crimes,
INCLUDING entering someone else's land to obstruct them from causing
damage on your land, can leave you liable.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article , Anthony E Anson
writes
The message
from Kay Easton contains these words:

Mycelial strands when they meet sometimes join and form fruit bodies.

I this asexual or sexual reproduction, or is the concept not relevant?
It's a long time ago that I learnt about fungi, if indeed I ever did!


But what I was referring to was that the Act says you mustn't dig up
plants, not that you mustn't pick fruit.

Fungi are not plants: they occupy a completely separate phylum.

That's what I thought - but it was someone else that brought truffles
into the argument!!

--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

In article , BAC
writes

"Kay Easton" wrote in message
...
In article , Colin Davidson
writes

"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...

The same is true of those things on private land. It is one of the
relics of Roman law, as passed on by the 'Anglo-Saxons'. The game
laws are a legacy of the Norman banditry.

That infamous Countryside Act made the DIGGING UP of all plants
comparable to the taking of game, rather than the picking of fruit.

And that's fair enough, when you think about it. The last thing we want
is
people wanering about diggint things up from the wild... I wonder if that
would apply to truffles?

They're fruit bodies, aren't they, rather than the entire 'plant'?


Are truffles 'plants'?

I have no idea of their current status! ISTR when I was a kid, they were
regarded as plants, but aren't they now regarded as something entirely
separate? So I thought they were 'plants' rather than plants ;-)

I know they're not animals!


--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

On 8 May 2003 08:30:26 GMT, (Nick Maclaren) wrote:


Pure H. non-scripta is almost certainly beyond hope in the long
term, and will follow the wild form of the daffodil into extinction.
The same is probably true of most local strains of primroses,
and so on.

OK all non-scripta which aren't vegetatively reproduced will, in time,
even in the depths of the most inaccessible wood, fall prey to the
pollen of the Spaniard. The only dark true blue nodders will be in
people's gardens with any seedlings weeded out.

OK. I see your reasoning. Get as many as possible under protection
(without creating ravages on the native wild stocks).

Yep. My you are a radical aren't you!

Respect

Hussein

Grow a little garden

spam block - for real addy, reverse letters of second level domain.

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

But they don't migrate. Dig up the parent bulb and you get the bulbules
with it.

Only if you remove a large lump of topsoil, too. If you have ever
tried to get rid of bluebells, you will know how hard it is to do.

I transplanted all the bulbs from a bed last winter (Including some
bluebells) and the only ones which escaped my notice were a few
kinadoxae and some juvenile grape hyacinth. And it's not as if the soil
in my new plot is exactly friable - yet.

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:
In article ,
Anthony E Anson wrote:

Trespass is a Common Law offence, and unless you commit a crime while
trespassing you cannot be prosecuted - this only applies to the criminal
law - you can only be sued. Damages for common trespass, if awarded,
generally amount to something like one penny, and the costs are usually
borne by the litigants.

That is no longer true since the infamous Criminal Justice and Public
Order Act. A policeman can turn trespass into a crime under certain
not-very-stringent conditions.

It is still true. When you are engaged in gamekeeping on any level you
have to know, and common trespass cannot be made into a criminal
offence. Indeed, it is very difficult to persuade PC Dibble to look into
anything which they consider - or hope - to be covered by Common Law.

Under the "rave" section, a policeman can even turn insistence on your
legal rights with no offence or even tort involved into a crime. I
heard of one case where it was claimed that it happened, too.

Hearsay evidence? And, when have you ever heard of the police
intervening in the case of a rave? I have heard of many instances of
them wringing their hands and pleading inability to act though.

However, theft, damage, poaching etc can result in the serious
(criminal) charge of Aggravated Trespass, which can result in heavy
fines, imprisonment and confiscation of any tools used in its execution
- which includes a vehicle.

Not just those. Several other things, which are not themselves crimes,
INCLUDING entering someone else's land to obstruct them from causing
damage on your land, can leave you liable.

I think you are wrting your own laws here - or painting them to suit
your agenda.

--
Tony
Replace solidi with dots to reply: tony/anson snailything zetnet/co/uk

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi

In article ,
Kay Easton writes:
|
| Are truffles 'plants'?
|
| I have no idea of their current status! ISTR when I was a kid, they were
| regarded as plants, but aren't they now regarded as something entirely
| separate? So I thought they were 'plants' rather than plants ;-)

Yes. They are regarded as a separate kingdom, just like plants
and animals. Some of the things that were rolled into the 'plant'
kingdom have been separated off even more drastically, though I
forget the terms for the levels higher than kingdom.

As I recall, all multi-cellular organisms are now classified as
plants, animals, fungi or slime moulds, but with a few oddities
like the probable composite organism Euglena.

| I know they're not animals!

Paradoxically, you are nearly wrong :-)

DNA evidence confirms that fungi are slightly more closely related
to animals than either is to plants. The bichemists had suspected
that for decades. So you could reasonably classify them as animals,
if you move the division up a bit!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Hussein M. writes:
|
| OK. I see your reasoning. Get as many as possible under protection
| (without creating ravages on the native wild stocks).
|
| Yep. My you are a radical aren't you!

Yes!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.