Via Gellia woods up for sale

[AR]

It's been brought to my attention that a significant chunk of the woods in the Via Gellia have been put up for sale - https://www.tustins.co.uk/woodland-for-sale/via-gellia-woods/194/

These are currently owned by Cromford Key estates, and although there's no formal access agreement on the majority of the accessible mines they've not prohibited access. Unfortunately, that may change under new ownership, this could affect Spinney Level, Merry Tom, Silver Eye, Old Gells, Dunsley Springs and Slaley Sough among others. Looking at some of the areas for sale, any potential purchasers wandering round for a look could well get a nasty surprise and DCRO get a call out...

 

[AR]

Looking again at the brochure, I notice there's no mention of the fact that the woods are all SSSI sites.

 

[LadyMud]

Lot 2: "a track leading to an old recreational mine operating as an attraction to paying visitors."
Is that Goodluck Mine?

 

[AR]

Yes, that's Goodluck being referred to - "old recreational mine", are they suggesting t'owd man dug it for fun?

 

[Tripod]

The woodland for sale comprises all that which covers the sides of the valley from Bonsal to Grange Mill. The agent's description places emphasis on timber extraction. This would damage archaeological remains and as for the SSSI status that is being ignored. More, new discoveries could be made but would likely be buried before anyone was notified. I saw timber extraction at Rough Pitty Side after a piece of woodland was sold - very efficient and quite devastating.
Make what you will of the agent's description - among other concerns I have doubts about the species description.
Do we know of any flora and fauna research documents? The last Slow Worm I saw had recently shed its skin, showing gorgeous colours and was catching the last warmth of the day in that woodland.
On an associated topic, when driving through the Peak District yesterday I noted a lot of dead trees. Ash dieback is changing the landscape.

 

[RobinGriffiths]

This is also the first year I've actually noticed ash dieback in North Wales.

 

[AR]

There must be some research documents associated with the original designation as SSSI that evidenced the ecological value of the woodlands, and as the northern side lies within the national park it's possible PDNPA ecologists may have done work there too.

I wonder if the potential liabilities around ash dieback and the busy main road is what's prompted the current owners to put it on the market. The National Trust did a lot of cutting back either side of the Litton Mill road recently, likewise Natural England and PDNPA in other places and it's all about getting the affected trees down before they come down themselves; the fungus gets into the heartwood and rots it out.

 

[Tripod]

The "potential liabilities" idea makes sense but selling it all off is a bit drastic (having said that I was once offered, maybe not altogether seriously, some woodland very cheap for the same reason). Much more drastic would be losing a Derbyshire scenic landmark to timber extraction, along with all the disruption and additional damage that would cause.
The plan does not appear to have been researched and thought through properly.
A couple more thoughts - is the Mineral Rights issue as clear cut as the sales information suggests? The potential for timber extraction and for coppicing do not seem to have been fully considered. Some of the information given (about past activity) seems to be guesswork.
There are financial reasons for buying woodland but would this land be worked or left? What might the long term plan be?

 

[Wayland Smith]

The "important notice" on the sale document basically says.
If we are talking rubbish it's your responsibility to check" So a blanket get-out clause!

 

[tomferry]

That’s not cheap !

 

[AR]

The "potential liabilities" idea makes sense but selling it all off is a bit drastic (having said that I was once offered, maybe not altogether seriously, some woodland very cheap for the same reason). Much more drastic would be losing a Derbyshire scenic landmark to timber extraction, along with all the disruption and additional damage that would cause.
The plan does not appear to have been researched and thought through properly.
A couple more thoughts - is the Mineral Rights issue as clear cut as the sales information suggests? The potential for timber extraction and for coppicing do not seem to have been fully considered. Some of the information given (about past activity) seems to be guesswork.
There are financial reasons for buying woodland but would this land be worked or left? What might the long term plan be?

The brochure reads to me like it's intended to hook someone with more money than sense - anything other than emergency tree removal is going to need SSSI works consent unless you want to run the risk of prosecution. I can see thinning works getting the OK, particularly if coupled with a replanting scheme, but not clearcutting. I don't see it as being an asset that could generate money, unless there's some sort of tax benefit that could be swung by ownership.

As for mineral rights, it's possible some parts do have the lead rights (the bits within Ible and Griffe Grange liberties) but not within Bonsall or Middleton, which are both Low Peak Kingsfield. I would expect the spar and stone rights do come with the land but again, being SSSI it's unlikely they could be worked, even if there were economically viable deposits. The Ible gold vein is just outside the sale area...

 

[ChrisB]

Would it be worth drawing the brochure to the attention of Natural England in the hope that they will have a word with the agents? If the buyer were to damage the SSSI and be prosecuted, would a seller who didn't disclose the facts be complicit?

 

[kay]

Would it be worth drawing the brochure to the attention of Natural England in the hope that they will have a word with the agents? If the buyer were to damage the SSSI and be prosecuted, would a seller who didn't disclose the facts be complicit?

Done

 

[Flotsam]

That’s not cheap !

Exactly my thoughts. The price of woodland has rocketed in the last twenty years but this appears to be a most extreme example given the potential restrictions.

 

[ChrisJC]

The potential restrictions seem to make it basically worthless. More of a liability, entirely beholden to the interest of others.

Perhaps a local cave / mine interest group could put in a cheeky offer on the bits of speleological interest.

Chris.

 

[tomferry]

The potential restrictions seem to make it basically worthless. More of a liability, entirely beholden to the interest of others.

Perhaps a local cave / mine interest group could put in a cheeky offer on the bits of speleological interest.

Chris.

I was thinking this or along the lines of “written access rights for next x years “

 

[Tripod]

I agree with the comment above regarding the rising price of woodland and the prices quoted for the Via Gellia woodlands going way beyond these. I note that the agents offer advice for would-be investors. Maybe aiming at someone who wants to tuck some funds away, free of tax and with a long term view of having a favourable return? Maybe looking for someone, who for whatever reason, wants to own a part of Derbyshire? The whole scheme appears to lack thought, research and detail but has a target buyer/target buyers.
I see that the same agent is selling Crich Chase.
There is a side of me which is saying "what is going on", "why now", and what long term plan (beyond "more money than sense") might there be in place?

 

[Fjell]

I think it is fishing for someone to buy it for non-commercial reasons.

With regard to IHT, overpaying for an asset doesn’t really help. Top tip: give it to your kids before you die.

 

[AR]

I think it is fishing for someone to buy it for non-commercial reasons.

With regard to IHT, overpaying for an asset doesn’t really help. Top tip: give it to your kids before you die.

I'd agree, I can't see it being commercially viable for forestry operations even before you factor in the statutory issues. As I've said above, my gut feeling about the current owner selling is that they see it as an immediate liability over ash dieback and the road, with little prospect of longer-term returns, which makes selling the rational course of action.

Yes, overpaying doesn't help with IHT, you either have to mortgage the asset to reduce its net value, or pass it on to your heirs either directly or in trust - then avoid dying for seven years. Ask the current Duke of Devonshire about what happened with his grandad...

 

[pwhole]

The potential restrictions seem to make it basically worthless. More of a liability, entirely beholden to the interest of others.

Perhaps a local cave / mine interest group could put in a cheeky offer on the bits of speleological interest.

Chris.

Much land in Britain is basically worthless - it just hasn't quite sunk in yet for many people. But I agree, it might be worth a mining group sticking their oar in - at least it would raise the profile of the sheer amount of abandoned workings that the new owner(s) would be taking on, and the absolute nightmare they'd face trying to keep folks out, if they didn't want access to continue. Middleton Mine doesn't seem to have been impregnable for long, despite the 'raised security' of the last few years.