to think no one should own land and ignore a sign saying private woods

[mls3]

Ok o will probably get flamed here.

But there is a badly managed woods near me with am old broken sign that say private woods. Aibu to collect a few broken branches for the wood burner? I know it is stealing, but this woods is overgrown and I'm thinking how unethical it is for anyone to own land.

Land used to all be free, until someone carved it all up to hoard for themselves. If land was still free now maybe we wouldn't have to all be working such stupid hours wasting our lives doing a job we don't like.

I'm only talking about a few small bits, not going in with a chain saw.

At the moment it gets too hot if I put any actual logs in the burner but a small fire only to last an hour or so would be good until it gets cold.

Bought be a nameless overseas investor. Fenced off and left whilst waiting on planning.

Like most of the UK, sold off to the detriment of its residents.

Igotafreegoattoo - Then the "proles" can buy their own land. I'd not be happy with a "prole" coming into my garden and helping him/her self.
Who is able to judge how this person is not looking after their land? That person may be looking after it perfectly well - bequeathing it to wildlife. What can be less "prole" than that??

I would have taken the sticks and never even questioned whether it was theft or not. I would never have even considered that sticks in a wood belonged to someone. A garden would be entirely different thing.

I often take shells from beaches, conkers, pinecones from where they fall, I can't see why a stick is any different. Anyone that would complain about someone taking some sticks needs to a take very long hard look at themselves and what kind of person they are.

I've said it so many times but the vast majority of MNers do not live in the real world. The police would laughing your face if you called them because someone was removing sticks from your woods.

Igot personally I DO have quite a lot of sympathy with concern around inherited privelege and the major mechanism of that being land ownership being in the hands of the tiny minority etc.

BUT it hasn't been established that the wood in question is not being maintained or stwearded properly so that line of argument is specious.

Moreover, radical socialist philosophy is complete overkill for what is essentially a question about wanting to claim a couple of branches.

Just take the bloody wood. Ask, don't ask. Magna Carta really doesn't come into this.

Crossed posts - but, has anyone noticed any more wildlife around, in that land? Perhaps no-one has even thought to register it . . .

It's not necessarily just because they want it to themselves. We had a "Keep-Out" sign on a small bit of woodland we owned because a lot of the trees were dangerously rotten in places (this was just after we'd bought it) and needed a lot of tree surgery - if some plonker like the OP had come along and been hit by a falling limb, or even a falling tree, we would have been liable.

There could have been anything in there. Electrical exchanges / transformers, unstable walls, small disused quarries or pits, rare animals or plants as a previous poster said - sometimes it's about safety and genuine concern rather than a simple MINE! attitude.

All thumbs are fingers but not all fingers are thumbs. Think about the logic OP.

HappyBubbleBrain - If there is a sign up saying "This is Private Land" - then that is probably exactly what it means, no matter how old or badly-written it may be. It is, effectively, the same as someone's garden.
And a few sticks does not equate to the OP's branches. (Still theft, nonetheless)

And the WI pensioners

Mine mine mine...my precious sticks. Honestly OP if you aren't running around with a chainsaw have at it.

Badlad

They might laugh at people taking sticks, Igot, they might be less amused by people trespassing or breaking and entering.

Hell I (or rather, my dog) takes sticks from public woodland. That's not a problem unless you're in a strict conservation area, when it may indeed be illegal to remove wood and things like that.

This has to be a piss take thread...

There is no need to call me names, we are all adults here.

Spoke to my dad, very level headed. He said just take it. He used to do the same once in another woods, and one day he came across the owner and the owner said now you have asked if you can take it then your not allowed to anymore as the farmer would know about it be liable.

*I would have taken the sticks and never even questioned whether it was theft or not. I would never have even considered that sticks in a wood belonged to someone. A garden would be entirely different thing.+

Even when there's a sign up telling you that it belongs to someone?

I often take shells from beaches, conkers, pinecones from where they fall, I can't see why a stick is any different. Anyone that would complain about someone taking some sticks needs to a take very long hard look at themselves and what kind of person they are.

Again, are there signs up telling you that it's private land? No? Then it's not a problem.

OP is the sign wooden? Just take that and burn it. Then if you do get caught at least you can say there's no sign

Police don't care about trespass (isn't it a civil matter?), breaking and entering is a bit far fetched if she jumps a fence?!

I stand corrected, Arsenic.

Still a great episode.

I'm not sure if trespass is a civil matter or not Igot, but the breaking and entering was referring to previous posters who admitted to tearing down fences. Not entirely sure whether that would class as criminal damage either.

And a great line

Igotafreegoattoo - OP is the sign wooden? Just take that and burn it. Then if you do get caught at least you can say there's no sign

You sound lovely -

I probably wouldn't have noticed the sign, I'd have been too busy looking at the ground in my hunt for sticks, or at the sky which belongs to no-one.

mls3 Fri 26-Sep-14 11:33:00

Yes I own my own home and if it was disused and in a state of bad repair I would have no issues with someone squatting.

That must pose an interesting ethical dilemma for the OP.