Still jumping on Himalayan Balsam

[alindsay]

What about other 'notifiable' plaants, ie Giant Hogweed and Ragwort. Whom are you suppost to notify and what are their legal obligations once notified?

[Deb London]

I found some today, a tiny amount. It was upstream of "everywhere", so it was a surprise to find it, and don't recall it being there before. Sorry to say this "sparks", but after reading most of this thread, I'll be donning my wellies and strangling the life out of it (or delicately cutting the heads off, depending on how I feel). And if I can trace the source then I'll be coming back to WAB for advice on how to proceed (landowners be warned, I can smell the stuff a mile away).

[Johnny Redgate]

Originally Posted by alindsay

What about other 'notifiable' plaants, ie Giant Hogweed and Ragwort. Whom are you suppost to notify and what are their legal obligations once notified?

My understanding (and I'm sure there are others who know more who can correct me) is that there are at least two different pieces of legislation involved. A notifiable weed is one defined under the Weeds Act (195?) as injurious and the person notified is the owner/occupier of the land on which the weeds grow. The defined weeds are only a few (ragwort, broad-leaved dock, creeping thistle and a few others) and their presence must be threatening agricultural land. So the person whose land is threatened can serve notice on the landowner of the infested land to control the weeds. The exact process evades me at the moment but used to be via MAFF so now presumably DEFRA. Ragwort was considered by the equestrian fraternity to be insufficiently dealt with because horse pasture is not considered to be agricultural land.

As others have said, the Wildlife and Countryside Act schedules a whole bunch of invasive alien species that it is illegal to plant, cause to grow, release in the wild etc. There is guidance from DEFRA available on the definitions but it seems that gardens and managed amenity plantings do not constitute "the wild" provided that steps are taken to prevent spread into the wild. There is no specific duty to manage scheduled species not introduced to your land by your own actions, although in certain circumstances there would be a case to answer (but not so far tested in the courts). See http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications...ryside-act.pdf

[Adam Cheeseman]

Subject to the provisions of this Part, if any person plants or otherwise causes to grow in the wild any plant which is included in Part II of Schedule 9, he shall be guilty of an offence.

Natural England clarification
Causing to grow in the wild
23. We would expect that where plants listed in Schedule 9 are grown in private gardens, amenity areas etc, reasonable measures will be taken to confine them to the cultivated area so as to prevent their spreading to the wider environment and beyond the landowner‟s control. It is our view that any failure to do so, which in turn results in the plant spreading to the wild, could be considered as „causing to grow in the wild‟ and as such would constitute an offence. If an individual does not have sufficient ability or the resources to manage a species so as to prevent its spreading to the wild, thereby exposing him or herself to the risk of committing an offence, he/she should seriously consider whether planting a Schedule 9 species is appropriate.

Cheers,

Adam

[Johnny Redgate]

Originally Posted by Adam Cheeseman

Subject to the provisions of this Part, if any person plants or otherwise causes to grow in the wild any plant which is included in Part II of Schedule 9, he shall be guilty of an offence.

Natural England clarification
Causing to grow in the wild
23. We would expect that where plants listed in Schedule 9 are grown in private gardens, amenity areas etc, reasonable measures will be taken to confine them to the cultivated area so as to prevent their spreading to the wider environment and beyond the landowner‟s control. It is our view that any failure to do so, which in turn results in the plant spreading to the wild, could be considered as „causing to grow in the wild‟ and as such would constitute an offence. If an individual does not have sufficient ability or the resources to manage a species so as to prevent its spreading to the wild, thereby exposing him or herself to the risk of committing an offence, he/she should seriously consider whether planting a Schedule 9 species is appropriate.

Cheers,

Adam

Yes, this is the same guidance as I tried to summarise in my last post. Where the scheduled invasive species on your land has not been introduced by you there seems to be (as yet) no specific duty to manage it.

[Neil Jones]

Originally Posted by Johnny Redgate

My understanding (and I'm sure there are others who know more who can correct me) is that there are at least two different pieces of legislation involved. A notifiable weed is one defined under the Weeds Act (195?) as injurious and the person notified is the owner/occupier of the land on which the weeds grow. The defined weeds are only a few (ragwort, broad-leaved dock, creeping thistle and a few others) and their presence must be threatening agricultural land. So the person whose land is threatened can serve notice on the landowner of the infested land to control the weeds. The exact process evades me at the moment but used to be via MAFF so now presumably DEFRA. Ragwort was considered by the equestrian fraternity to be insufficiently dealt with because horse pasture is not considered to be agricultural land.
[/url]

There is no such thing as a notifiable weed under UK law. Ragwort the notifiable weed falsehood No notifiable weed in UK law

It is quite true that the horsey fraternity have been making a fuss. The Advertising Standards Authority took action on this recently. A British Horse Society Leaflet was stopped and a number of companies claiming large numbers of horse deaths had to change their advertising.

Ragwort The sense and the nonsense.

[Johnny Redgate]

This brief summary is from Natural England's website.

Injurious weeds - five weeds are classified under the Weeds Act 1959: common ragwort (Senecio jacobaea), spear thistle (Cirsium vulgare), creeping or field thistle (Cirsium arvense), broad-leaved dock (Rumex obtusifolius) and curled dock (Rumex Crispus). It is not an offence to have these weeds growing on your land and species such as ragwort have significant conservation benefits. However they must not be allowed to spread to agricultural land, particularly grazing areas or land which is used to produce conserved forage. Enforcement notices can be issued following complaints requiring landowners to take action to prevent the spread of these weeds.

I think this is pretty close to what I said in my previous post, but you are correct, the term notifaible is not used.