Fruit picking & public footpath
NT
footpath?
The public footpath is clearly signposted as such.
Some fruit is on trees planted in people's gardens, with some branches
overhanging the path.
Some fruit is on plants that are entirely on the footpath side of the
garden fences.
A detail that might perhaps be relevant is that the layout is as
follows, from left to right: privately owned fence, soil with assorted
wild plants, tarmacced path, more soil, another fence. I assume the
whole width from fence to fence is public footpath, but if that's not
the case it might change the pciture.
NT
Ian Smith
> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a
> public footpath?
On a similar topic, what of fruit growing on a tree in a public (local
authority owned) park?
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
steve robinson
Theft.
Wm...
uk.legal.moderated NT <meow...@care2.com>
I would have thought the general rule of where the fruit might drop
would apply. i.e. if the fruit would fall in a place where anyone using
the stated public path could pick it up and pop it into their mouth then
it is yours if you happen to be using the path or could squish it under
your boot.
Probably best to ask for permission if you want to scrump as an adult,
mind you, if only because people don't take as kindly to people
scrambling over their fences as they once did.
Time was people would think "it is just the boys after the apples, let
them be".
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
a...@b.invalid
>> public footpath?
> Theft.
I'm not sure you'd be able to provide dishonesty.
Wm...
uk.legal.moderated Ian Smith <i...@astounding.org.uk>
>On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 01:10:02 +0100, NT <meow...@care2.com> wrote:
>
>> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a
>> public footpath?
>
>On a similar topic, what of fruit growing on a tree in a public (local
>authority owned) park?
We pick 'em here, but "my" local park was one of the first truly public
parks in London, rules are probably different in Royal parks and so on.
Quite ordinary to see people collecting fruit (cherries (loads of) and
plums (various)) and mushrooms (mainly me) in season. Cob nuts (damn
messy to get out of their outsides) and similar are available too. Never
seen anyone being stopped from using what is available ... except for
the fish in the lake. British people seem to get weird about that!
Wm...
<xn0hi2wb...@reader80.eternal-september.org> uk.legal.moderated
steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
Disagree strongly.
If I am allowed to cut down branches from a neighbours overhanging tree
(so long as I throw them back over the fence) why can I not pick up
fruit that falls from their tree into my garden?
Or are you going to go all obscure on us and say that I have to throw
their fruit into their garden and they have to throw the fruit from my
tree into my garden so no-one ever gets to eat the fruit?
Zapp Brannigan
"Wm..." <tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote in message
news:sC83mERWO3TOFwus@[127.0.0.1]...
> steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
>>NT wrote:
>>> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a
>>> public footpath?
>>
>
> Disagree strongly.
>
> If I am allowed to cut down branches from a neighbours overhanging tree
> (so long as I throw them back over the fence) why can I not pick up fruit
> that falls from their tree into my garden?
You've refuted your own point. If you cut an overhanging branch from a
neighbour's tree you are obliged to offer* it back to him because the law
presumes it to be his property. Fruit growing on an overhanging branch
would be just the same.
(* Not just throw it over the fence, because if he doesn't want it then
disposal is your responsibility).
NT
wrote:
> Sat, 20 Aug 2011 01:10:02
> uk.legal.moderated NT <meow2...@care2.com>
>
> >What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a public
> >footpath?
>
> >The public footpath is clearly signposted as such.
> >Some fruit is on trees planted in people's gardens, with some branches
> >overhanging the path.
> >Some fruit is on plants that are entirely on the footpath side of the
> >garden fences.
>
> >A detail that might perhaps be relevant is that the layout is as
> >follows, from left to right: privately owned fence, soil with assorted
> >wild plants, tarmacced path, more soil, another fence. I assume the
> >whole width from fence to fence is public footpath, but if that's not
> >the case it might change the pciture.
>
> I would have thought the general rule of where the fruit might drop
> would apply. i.e. if the fruit would fall in a place where anyone using
> the stated public path could pick it up and pop it into their mouth then
> it is yours if you happen to be using the path or could squish it under
> your boot.
>
> Probably best to ask for permission if you want to scrump as an adult,
> mind you, if only because people don't take as kindly to people
> scrambling over their fences as they once did.
>
> Time was people would think "it is just the boys after the apples, let
> them be".
How does scrambling over fences come into this?
If picking from overhanging tree limbs is technically verboten,
presumably the plants growing on the footpath side of the fence are
free to pick.
NT
Wm...
uk.legal.moderated Zapp Brannigan <ZBr...@DOOP.com>
>
>"Wm..." <tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote in message
>news:sC83mERWO3TOFwus@[127.0.0.1]...
>> steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
>>>NT wrote:
>>>> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a
>>>> public footpath?
>>>
>>>Theft.
>>
>> Disagree strongly.
>>
>> If I am allowed to cut down branches from a neighbours overhanging
>>tree (so long as I throw them back over the fence) why can I not pick
>>up fruit that falls from their tree into my garden?
>
>You've refuted your own point.
How so?
> If you cut an overhanging branch from a neighbour's tree you are
>obliged to offer* it back to him because the law presumes it to be his
>property.
>(* Not just throw it over the fence, because if he doesn't want it then
>disposal is your responsibility).
I was talking casually, jeez.
> Fruit growing on an overhanging branch would be just the same.
Don't think so, actually.
Oh come on, Zapp, you know what I mean. You've snipped the obviously
silly bit where my neighbours and I throw fruit at each other yelling
"yours" and "mine".
Sure you've made your point about your neighbour yet? I get on well
with mine and have been given picking rights. Plums and figs (double
cropping) and elderberries are the main crops and they like it when they
get some jam or conserve back. Wood pigeons seem to get most of the
elderberries as it happens so not enough for wine.
Zapp Brannigan
> Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:15:02 <j2ntqj$edd$1...@dont-email.me> uk.legal.moderated
> Zapp Brannigan <ZBr...@DOOP.com>
>>"Wm..." <tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote in message
>>news:sC83mERWO3TOFwus@[127.0.0.1]...
>>> steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
>>>>NT wrote:
>>>>> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a
>>>>> public footpath?
>>>>
>>>>Theft.
>>>
>>> Disagree strongly.
>>>
>>> If I am allowed to cut down branches from a neighbours overhanging tree
>>> (so long as I throw them back over the fence) why can I not pick up
>>> fruit that falls from their tree into my garden?
>>
>>You've refuted your own point.
>
> How so?
Because you've noted the fact that the overhanging foliage is the property
of your neighbour, and you should be able to extrapolate from that to
include the branches, twigs, leaves, nuts, seeds and fruit. If not, I'm
happy to clarify that they are regarded the same way in law.
>> If you cut an overhanging branch from a neighbour's tree you are
>> obliged to offer* it back to him because the law presumes it to be his
>> property.
>
>>(* Not just throw it over the fence, because if he doesn't want it then
>>disposal is your responsibility).
>
> I was talking casually, jeez.
The OP's question was "What is the legal situation with picking fruit?".
> Sure you've made your point about your neighbour yet? I get on well with
> mine and have been given picking rights.
I get on very well with my neighbours, and I would prefer that you didn't
make unpleasant innuendos of that kind towards me.
Roland Perry
<c633035e-4813-44f7...@q5g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, at
11:45:02 on Sat, 20 Aug 2011, NT <meow...@care2.com> remarked:
>If picking from overhanging tree limbs is technically verboten,
>presumably the plants growing on the footpath side of the fence are
>free to pick.
Further evidence of this is that only certain plants are specifically
protected from this (bluebells for example).
As it's "that time of year", most people would expect that picking
blackberrys from 'common' land (which in urban areas would include parks
and pathways maintained by the council) is allowed. It's not as if the
council will send its staff out to pick them instead, to sell in the
local market (although as this is Usenet I fully expect someone to be
able to find a counter-example).
--
Roland Perry
Djornsk
Slightly OT but perhaps the vast quantities of fruit left to rot on
trees and in hedgerows gives a good picture of what an affluant society
we are.
j
andy1973
>
> I get on very well with my neighbours
Zapp Brannigan
"andy1973" <andy.archard...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:YMednXwAXuPZMdLT...@bt.com...
>
>>
>> I get on very well with my neighbours
> ....but not necessarily with all Usenet neighbours.
On usenet, everyone is your neighbour.
And no-one can hear you scream.... :o)
NT
> In message
> <c633035e-4813-44f7-b6c2-98f582881...@q5g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, at
> 11:45:02 on Sat, 20 Aug 2011, NT <meow2...@care2.com> remarked:
>
> >If picking from overhanging tree limbs is technically verboten,
> >presumably the plants growing on the footpath side of the fence are
> >free to pick.
>
> Further evidence of this is that only certain plants are specifically
> protected from this (bluebells for example).
>
> As it's "that time of year", most people would expect that picking
> blackberrys from 'common' land (which in urban areas would include parks
> and pathways maintained by the council) is allowed. It's not as if the
> council will send its staff out to pick them instead, to sell in the
> local market (although as this is Usenet I fully expect someone to be
> able to find a counter-example).
Thank you, and everyone thats posted, I know understand why as well as
what. I'll leave the elders - though for curiosity I cant help
wondering if one could pick them, offer them back to the people whose
garden theyre in, and then be within the law if they say no thanks.
NT
steve robinson
We are not talking fallen fruit, the op said picking, which means
taking from the tree
Mark Goodge
If the tree is cultivated (as opposed to growing wild) then the fruit
belongs to the owner of the tree. The fact that a public footpath (by which
I presume you mean a public right of way) crosses the land onto which the
fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
As always, gardenlaw.co.uk is your friend in this respect:
http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html
The exception to the above is if the fruit is from a plant which is growing
wild rather than cultivated. In such a case, it is not theft unless the
picking is done for commercial purposes:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/4
(see paragraph 3)
Mark
--
Blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk
Paul Cummins
Perry) wrote:
> As it's "that time of year", most people would expect that picking
> blackberrys from 'common' land (which in urban areas would include
> parks and pathways maintained by the council) is allowed. It's not
> as if the council will send its staff out to pick them instead, to
> sell in the local market (although as this is Usenet I fully expect
> someone to be able to find a counter-example).
I recall well as a child going onto Frimley Common and picking
blackberries, redberries, wild strawberries, currants, and crab apples,
all of which were made into jam by my mother.
I have no doubt of the questionable lawfulness, as my father always
referred to it as scrumping, but as a scouser, he took part with gusto.
It's strange that the finished Jam always tasted far better than the
berries ever did raw.
Lately I've spotted people picking such brambles at the roadside, which I
would have thought is a bad idea, given the number of carcinogenic
chemicals in Exhaust fumes.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
Alex Heney
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
>Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:50:02
><xn0hi2wb...@reader80.eternal-september.org> uk.legal.moderated
>steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
>
>>NT wrote:
>>
>>> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a
>>> public footpath?
>>>
>>> The public footpath is clearly signposted as such.
>>> Some fruit is on trees planted in people's gardens, with some
>>> branches overhanging the path.
>>> Some fruit is on plants that are entirely on the footpath side of
>>> the garden fences.
>>>
>>> A detail that might perhaps be relevant is that the layout is as
>>> follows, from left to right: privately owned fence, soil with
>>> assorted wild plants, tarmacced path, more soil, another fence. I
>>> assume the whole width from fence to fence is public footpath, but
>>> if that's not the case it might change the pciture.
>>>
>>>
>>> NT
>>
>>Theft.
>
>Disagree strongly.
>
>If I am allowed to cut down branches from a neighbours overhanging tree
>(so long as I throw them back over the fence) why can I not pick up
>fruit that falls from their tree into my garden?
You can - provided you give it back to the owners.
>
>Or are you going to go all obscure on us and say that I have to throw
>their fruit into their garden and they have to throw the fruit from my
>tree into my garden so no-one ever gets to eat the fruit?
No throwing is necessary. You can be all nice and polite and hand it
back.
But the fruit still belongs to them, so unless they give you
permission to eat it, you can't legally do so.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
It's easier to get older than it is to get wiser.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Alex Heney
Very few public footpaths are on common land.
If they aren't, then any cultivated plant (including the fruits)
belongs to the owner of the land, and you cannot just legally take it
without permission from the landowner.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Ultimate office automation: networked coffee.
Roland Perry
21:25:02 on Sat, 20 Aug 2011, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>If the tree is cultivated (as opposed to growing wild) then the fruit
>belongs to the owner of the tree. The fact that a public footpath (by which
>I presume you mean a public right of way) crosses the land
What if it's also public land (amenity space or whatever the town
planners call it)? Perhaps trees on such land are only partially
cultivated, if the council plant them there and then jut let them grow.
>onto which the
>fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
>(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
>
>As always, gardenlaw.co.uk is your friend in this respect:
>
>http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html
>
>The exception to the above is if the fruit is from a plant which is growing
>wild rather than cultivated. In such a case, it is not theft unless the
>picking is done for commercial purposes
So picking wild blackberries is OK !
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
typed:
>In message <b55057ljjcntr7blk...@news.markshouse.net>, at
>21:25:02 on Sat, 20 Aug 2011, Mark Goodge
><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>If the tree is cultivated (as opposed to growing wild) then the fruit
>>belongs to the owner of the tree. The fact that a public footpath (by which
>>I presume you mean a public right of way) crosses the land
>
>What if it's also public land (amenity space or whatever the town
>planners call it)? Perhaps trees on such land are only partially
>cultivated, if the council plant them there and then jut let them grow.
If they're deliberately planted they're cultivated. "Wild" means self-set.
>>onto which the
>>fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
>>(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
>>
>>As always, gardenlaw.co.uk is your friend in this respect:
>>
>>http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html
>>
>>The exception to the above is if the fruit is from a plant which is growing
>>wild rather than cultivated. In such a case, it is not theft unless the
>>picking is done for commercial purposes
>
>So picking wild blackberries is OK !
Yes.
Nick Leverton
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>onto which the
>>fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
>>(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
So, as a corollary (to the cultivated case not the wild one), can I reach
over and pick my apples from my trees even if they're on the neihbour's
side of the fence ?
And, an interesting point - if my apples (unpicked, windfalling) break
his greenhouse, am I liable ?
>>As always, gardenlaw.co.uk is your friend in this respect:
>>
>>http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html
>>
>>The exception to the above is if the fruit is from a plant which is growing
>>wild rather than cultivated. In such a case, it is not theft unless the
>>picking is done for commercial purposes
>
>So picking wild blackberries is OK !
Ours just get a bit cross sometimes, but the neighbour is welcome to
any they can reach (cos I can't reach the back !)
Nick
--
Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010)
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996
Mark Goodge
and typed:
>In article <lvJaev0b...@perry.co.uk>,
>Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>onto which the
>>>fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
>>>(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
>
>So, as a corollary (to the cultivated case not the wild one), can I reach
>over and pick my apples from my trees even if they're on the neihbour's
>side of the fence ?
You own the fruit, yes. But if you need to enter your neighour's property
to retrieve it then you may be trespassing.
>And, an interesting point - if my apples (unpicked, windfalling) break
>his greenhouse, am I liable ?
Yes, definitely. If you don't want that to happen then you should prune
your tree so that there is no prospect of windfalls lanfing the other side
of the fence.
Saxman
> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a public
> footpath?
I am as confused as you even after reading this thread. I
I picked some ripe figs from a tree recently that was overhanging a public
footpath.
Should I have picked them and handed them back to the owner and said,
"Here you are, they're yours", or asked if I'm entitled to half of the
produce?
Or maybe given them to the local council?
Maybe I could have claimed that the branches interfered with my right,
pruned them, but could not find anywhere to returned the pruned branches,
but decided to keep the fruit anyway?
What about if one of the figs fell upon my car and dented the bodywork?
Who do I make a claim from?
Zapp Brannigan
"Saxman" <"john.h.williams2(removethis)"@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:op.v0i9blew6s6om4@user1-pc...
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 01:10:02 +0100, NT <meow...@care2.com> wrote:
>
>> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a public
>> footpath?
>
> I am as confused as you even after reading this thread. I
>
> I picked some ripe figs from a tree recently that was overhanging a public
> footpath.
>
> Should I have picked them and handed them back to the owner and said,
> "Here you are, they're yours", or asked if I'm entitled to half of the
> produce?
Legally, you should have not interfered with another person's property. If
it was necessary to do so (eg to clear a right of way) then you should
offer the removed foliage or fruit to the owner, or asked his permission to
keep them.
> What about if one of the figs fell upon my car and dented the bodywork?
> Who do I make a claim from?
Why were you driving on a public footpath? :o)
There is generally no liability upon the owner of a tree - damage from
falling leaves, bird-shit, conkers or sap are just nature in action. If
the owner knows that the tree is in a dangerous condition, then the picture
changes.
Nick Leverton
Anthony R. Gold <tg...@panix.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 23:35:02 +0100, Mark Goodge
><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 23:20:02 +0100, Nick Leverton put finger to keyboard
>> and typed:
>>
>>> his greenhouse, am I liable ?
>>
>> Yes, definitely.
>
Even if he (and this is all theoretical, he's a very friendly bloke)
observes the danger and doesn't mitigate it by pruning them as he is
entitled to do ?
Personally I'd be very happy if he kept his side in shape and took the
apples ... I don't look whose side the weeds have come from before
killing them !
Roland Perry
23:15:02 on Sat, 20 Aug 2011, Mark Goodge
>>>If the tree is cultivated (as opposed to growing wild) then the fruit
>>>belongs to the owner of the tree. The fact that a public footpath (by which
>>>I presume you mean a public right of way) crosses the land
>>
>>What if it's also public land (amenity space or whatever the town
>>planners call it)? Perhaps trees on such land are only partially
>>cultivated, if the council plant them there and then jut let them grow.
>
>If they're deliberately planted they're cultivated. "Wild" means self-set.
Who owns the trees on amenity space. I suppose it's the developer
initially, and maybe the council after they've "adopted" the roads
(although I've never heard the concept applied to the amenity space
before).
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nick Leverton <ni...@leverton.org> remarked:
>>>onto which the
>>>fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
>>>(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
>
>So, as a corollary (to the cultivated case not the wild one), can I reach
>over and pick my apples from my trees even if they're on the neihbour's
>side of the fence ?
I'd have thought so.
>And, an interesting point - if my apples (unpicked, windfalling) break
>his greenhouse, am I liable ?
The neighbour could have trimmed the branches, perhaps. Although they
often spread further from tree when they get loaded with fruit, so the
concept of overhanging-ness may change from month to month.
--
Roland Perry
Saxman
> Why were you driving on a public footpath? :o)
>
I wasn't, but the tree overgrowth exceeded the kerbside.
andrew
> Very few public footpaths are on common land.
True but it makes no difference
>
> If they aren't, then any cultivated plant (including the fruits)
> belongs to the owner of the land, and you cannot just legally take it
> without permission from the landowner.
>
And common land also has an owner with the same rights but with exceptions
for commoners, not the general public.
Uncultivated plants would be covered by the wildlife and countryside act.
Mind I cannot see a problem in most circumstances, the exception being areas
with statutory protections (SSSi etc). Is there any recent case law for
scrumping?
AJH
pete
It is begining to sound like you are confusing a footpath with a
footway. Not many footpaths have kerbs :-)
pete
Walt
> If I am allowed to cut down branches from a neighbours overhanging tree
> (so long as I throw them back over the fence) why can I not pick up
> fruit that falls from their tree into my garden?
>
> their fruit into their garden and they have to throw the fruit from my
> tree into my garden so no-one ever gets to eat the fruit?
>
You do NOT have to throw the cut branches back over the fence - you have to
OFFER them to the neighbour. If he/she declines them, then YOU have to
dispose of them.
Walt
Adam Funk
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 22:50:02 +0100, Roland Perry put finger to keyboard and
> typed:
>
>>In message <b55057ljjcntr7blk...@news.markshouse.net>, at
>>21:25:02 on Sat, 20 Aug 2011, Mark Goodge
>><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>>If the tree is cultivated (as opposed to growing wild) then the fruit
>>>belongs to the owner of the tree. The fact that a public footpath (by which
>>>I presume you mean a public right of way) crosses the land
>>
>>What if it's also public land (amenity space or whatever the town
>>planners call it)? Perhaps trees on such land are only partially
>>cultivated, if the council plant them there and then jut let them grow.
>
> If they're deliberately planted they're cultivated. "Wild" means self-set.
Is it a defence to argue that you reasonably thought something was wild?
>>>onto which the
>>>fruit may fall doesn't affect this in any way. Therefore, picking the fruit
>>>(or even collecting windfalls) is theft.
>>>
>>>As always, gardenlaw.co.uk is your friend in this respect:
>>>
>>>http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html
>>>
>>>The exception to the above is if the fruit is from a plant which is growing
>>>wild rather than cultivated. In such a case, it is not theft unless the
>>>picking is done for commercial purposes
>>
>>So picking wild blackberries is OK !
AFAICT it's the location that indicates that they are wild? We have
deliberately planted blackberries in our back garden beside a fence,
so that they look fairly obviously cultivated, but if I saw some
growing between a wall and the pavement, I'd be inclined to assume
they were wild.
Mark Goodge
typed:
>On 2011-08-20, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> If they're deliberately planted they're cultivated. "Wild" means self-set.
>
>Is it a defence to argue that you reasonably thought something was wild?
I would expect so, yes. It's part of the Theft Act, so the usual test for
dishonesty applies. If you genuinely and reasonably believe that a plant is
wild, rather than cultivated, you are not being dishonest when you pick its
fruit and hence you have not committed an offence.
>AFAICT it's the location that indicates that they are wild? We have
>deliberately planted blackberries in our back garden beside a fence,
>so that they look fairly obviously cultivated, but if I saw some
>growing between a wall and the pavement, I'd be inclined to assume
>they were wild.
The location is a good indicator, yes. And some plants - such as
blackberries - spread easily. If someone deliberately sets a blackberry
bush inside their garden, but it spreads outside it then I think it would
be reasonable to argue that the part which is rooted beyond the boundary
(as opposed to merely overhanging the boundary) is wild.
The other question is whether a cultivated plant can cease to be cultivated
due to a change of circumstances. Not far from where I live, there's a
former nursery gardens which closed down a few years ago (I don't know
exactly when, as it was before I moved here). As far as I can tell the
place simply went bust, leaving lots of plants just growing in the ground.
Some died, of course, but others have survived untended and the area is now
overgrown with a rather strange assortment of garden centre plants. The
land now belongs to developers, who have no interest in selling plants -
it's actually earmarked for housing - and certainly are making no attempt
to tend or cultivate the plants which are there. So does that mean they can
now be considered wild, and thus open for their fruit and flowers to be
picked by passers-by?
Roland Perry
08:10:02 on Mon, 22 Aug 2011, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>The other question is whether a cultivated plant can cease to be cultivated
>due to a change of circumstances. Not far from where I live, there's a
>former nursery gardens which closed down a few years ago (I don't know
>exactly when, as it was before I moved here). As far as I can tell the
>place simply went bust, leaving lots of plants just growing in the ground.
>Some died, of course, but others have survived untended and the area is now
>overgrown with a rather strange assortment of garden centre plants. The
>land now belongs to developers, who have no interest in selling plants -
>it's actually earmarked for housing - and certainly are making no attempt
>to tend or cultivate the plants which are there. So does that mean they can
>now be considered wild, and thus open for their fruit and flowers to be
>picked by passers-by?
Earlier you said that "cultivated" meant that it was planted
deliberately (not that it was subsequently tended), which would probably
apply to many of the plants; but some may have propagated by themselves
in the mean time.
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
typed:
>In message <55v3571fq5l479k06...@news.markshouse.net>, at
I was summarising. The Theft Act doesn't define "cultivated".
NT
wrote:
Thank you. I'm sure they are wild in this case.
NT
Adam Funk
> The other question is whether a cultivated plant can cease to be cultivated
> due to a change of circumstances. Not far from where I live, there's a
> former nursery gardens which closed down a few years ago (I don't know
> exactly when, as it was before I moved here). As far as I can tell the
> place simply went bust, leaving lots of plants just growing in the ground.
> Some died, of course, but others have survived untended and the area is now
> overgrown with a rather strange assortment of garden centre plants. The
> land now belongs to developers, who have no interest in selling plants -
> it's actually earmarked for housing - and certainly are making no attempt
> to tend or cultivate the plants which are there. So does that mean they can
> now be considered wild, and thus open for their fruit and flowers to be
> picked by passers-by?
Well, I would hope so, otherwise they must legally go to waste.
NT
> What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a public
> footpath?
>
> Some fruit is on trees planted in people's gardens, with some branches
> overhanging the path.
> Some fruit is on plants that are entirely on the footpath side of the
> garden fences.
>
> A detail that might perhaps be relevant is that the layout is as
> follows, from left to right: privately owned fence, soil with assorted
> wild plants, tarmacced path, more soil, another fence. I assume the
> whole width from fence to fence is public footpath, but if that's not
> the case it might change the pciture.
>
So...
1. What would be the situation if one were to plant the occasional
twig into the ground beside the tarmac path, in the soil? Then go back
and harvest it later.
2. There's some nice straight timber growing there, which I've every
reason to believe is also wild, not cultivated. Could one go cut a
limb or 2 down and haul it off?
NT
NT
> On Aug 20, 1:10 am, NT <meow2...@care2.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > What is the legal situation with picking fruit that overhangs a public
> > footpath?
>
> > The public footpath is clearly signposted as such.
> > Some fruit is on trees planted in people's gardens, with some branches
> > overhanging the path.
> > Some fruit is on plants that are entirely on the footpath side of the
> > garden fences.
>
> > A detail that might perhaps be relevant is that the layout is as
> > follows, from left to right: privately owned fence, soil with assorted
> > wild plants, tarmacced path, more soil, another fence. I assume the
> > whole width from fence to fence is public footpath, but if that's not
> > the case it might change the pciture.
>
> > NT
>
> So...
>
> 1. What would be the situation if one were to plant the occasional
> twig into the ground beside the tarmac path, in the soil? Then go back
> and harvest it later.
I presume sticking a stick in the ground would technically be
littering. Presumably it would not be a wild plant.