House purchase next to a farm.

[dickymint]

Equus said:

dickymint said:

"In fact, it doesn't - the EU has had naff all influence on UK Planning law"

I'll leave this here and withdraw

Yep, that's what I said. You can quote it all you like, with pleasure, but I'm not sure what your point is in doing so.

The principle of Environmental Impact Assessments emerged from the 'Clean Developments Mechanism' within the Kyoto Protocol (that pesky UN again... unless you've decided that Japan is part of Europe, too, now?).

Certainly, the EU was a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, but so is the UK in its own right.

Certainly, it was convenient for us to frame our legislation (the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact) Regulations 2011) to conform to the relevant EU Directive to its Member States, but we were/are separately and previously committed to comply, anyway. Like I said, EIA's are nothing to do with Europe.

Tell that to HMG.........

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/environmental-impact-a...

Hardly "naff all"

"These regulations apply the amended EU directive “on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment” (usually referred to as the ‘Environmental Impact Assessment Directive’) to the planning system in England. "

[Equus]

dickymint said:

Tell that to HMG.........

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/environmental-impact-a...

Hardly "naff all"

"These regulations apply the amended EU directive “on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment” (usually referred to as the ‘Environmental Impact Assessment Directive’) to the planning system in England. "

Yes, I explained all that above, if you had been bothered to read it instead of just highlighting my last sentence in bold.

[dickymint]

[Equus]

dickymint said:

You can bang you head all you like.

The fact remains that EIA's are an outcome of the Kyoto protocol, to which the UK is a separate and individual signatory. They would have existed, and will remain in existence, regardless of our membership of the EU (which, yes, was also a signatory and also handed down directives to its member states).

You yourself quoted UN Agenda 21 in support of your argument.

You really do need to get a grip on the difference between the EU and the UN, if you're trying to understand international politics and their influence on UK legislation.

[dickymint]

Equus said:

dickymint said:

You can bang you head all you like.

The fact remains that EIA's are an outcome of the Kyoto protocol, to which the UK is a separate and individual signatory. They would have existed, and will remain in existence, regardless of our membership of the EU (which, yes, was also a signatory and also handed down directives to its member states).

You yourself quoted UN Agenda 21 in support of your argument.

You really do need to get a grip on the difference between the EU and the UN, if you're trying to understand international politics and their influence on UK legislation.

Please don't patronise me I know full well the difference between the two. I added the Agenda 21 comment, as i stated, "for good measure" for the benefit of most people in here that will have have never heard of it let alone realise how much it influences ALL local councils including Planning. As does the EU.

"naff all" righty oh.

[limpsfield]

This comment was criminally overlooked.

Brick Top said:

alorotom said:

Oh I don’t know, lots of fringe benefits of living next to a pig farmer ...

be wary of any man who keeps a pig farm

[Equus]

dickymint said:

Please don't patronise me I know full well the difference between the two.

Then why mention a UN agenda in justification of an argument of EU influence.

I'm guessing you're one of those rabid Brexiteers who blames the EU for every bit of UK bureaucracy.

Lets settle for coming back in three years's time and reviewing what has changed then, shall we?

I'll double your pack of sausages and add some smoked bacon and a dozen eggs that EIA's are still with us...

[dickymint]

Equus said:

dickymint said:

Please don't patronise me I know full well the difference between the two.

Then why mention a UN agenda in justification of an argument of EU influence.

I'm guessing you're one of those rabid Brexiteers who blames the EU for every bit of UK bureaucracy.

Lets settle for coming back in three years's time and reviewing what has changed then, shall we?

I'll double your pack of sausages and add some smoked bacon and a dozen eggs that EIA's are still with us...

Read my post - I told you why i mentioned Agenda 21

What the fk has Brexit got to do with this debate and why are you calling me rabid?

Let's get this straight - you stated "the EU has naff all influence on UK Planning law" You are wrong according to this governments web site.

[Equus]

dickymint said:

Let's get this straight - you stated "the EU has naff all influence on UK Planning law" You are wrong according to this governments web site.

I will explain this just one more time, since you are either slow of thinking or being deliberately obtuse:

The Government's website does not tell the whole story: yes, the the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact) Regulations 2011 link to an EU Directive, but both the EU and the UK, independently were obliged to bring in this form of legislation because of the Kyoto Protocol and subsequent agreements.

We would have had EIA's regardless of Europe. It's as simple as that.

And the fact that you feel obliged to (wrongly) fixate on one tiny part of UK Planning legislation rather proves my broader point...

[dickymint]

Ah well at least the Newts are safe.....for now

https://amp.ft.com/content/83cf8ff0-eef0-11e6-ba01...

[Equus]

dickymint said:

Ah well at least the Newts are safe.....for now

https://amp.ft.com/content/83cf8ff0-eef0-11e6-ba01...

Link doesn't work.

Frantically Googling away trying to prove the implausible, are we?

As Donald Trump would say: sad (and no, he's not from the EU, either, though he lives a bit closer than either Kyoto or Rio de Janeiro).

I can tell you off the top of my head (because I work with it on a regular basis) that newts are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; which is a wholly UK piece of legislation.

[dickymint]

Equus said:

dickymint said:

Ah well at least the Newts are safe.....for now

https://amp.ft.com/content/83cf8ff0-eef0-11e6-ba01...

Link doesn't work.

Frantically Googling away trying to prove the implausible, are we?

As Donald Trump would say: sad (and no, he's not from the EU, either, though he lives a bit closer than either Kyoto or Rio de Janeiro).

I can tell you off the top of my head (because I work with it on a regular basis) that newts are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; which is a wholly UK piece of legislation.

Link works but paywalled......

“Britain’s great crested newts are facing a less certain future post-Brexit as ministers prepare to axe rights afforded to them by European legislation in a bid to speed up development projects.

Government figures have told the Financial Times that the EU habitats directive is among measures set to be repealed, citing the “excessive” protection given to the amphibian as a reason to change the law.”

They are covered by the EU. As a Country we can amend our own laws but not the EU directive.

[DonkeyApple]

boyse7en said:

We've got friends who are dairy farmers and even they don't like living on their own farm because of the flies, noise and occasional smells (apparently human waste is the worst, but chicken manure is a close second)

I've lived in proper rural countryside for my entire life and i wouldn't want to live next door to a working farmyard.

Exactly. The dumbasses on this thread who keep popping up to get all militant about living in the countryside are just that, dumbasses. Insecure little tits who can’t focus on the actual question being asked but five in ranting about their tiny football minded ‘them and us’ low functioning mentality.

Back in the real world, no one wants to pay one price to live next to a fruit farm and wake up in 5 years time to discover it has reverted to a pig farm and the overt negative impact on their property valuation. And it is a perfectly sensible matter to educate yourself over if thinking about buying such a property.

You really need to imagine the worst case scenario and then look at whether the property is upwind or down wind and just how close you really are. Suddenly having a field of intensively farmed pigs within a few yards and upwind is a horrific scenario whereas ending up with a few snufflers living in an apple orchard is rather pleasant.

Ultimately, it may be one of those properties best left to one of those thicko militant and insecure country types who might just inherit some money or their equally dense cousin in the city who has watched an ITV program about life in the country.

[RTB]

Change of use from fruit back to pigs won't be needed. They can also erect buildings under a certain size (465m2), extend existing buildings and carry out required ground work for agricultural purposes all as permitted development.

Will they do this though? My brother farms what is left of our family farm and moved from sheep and cattle to pigs (he has never much of a sheep/cattle farmer and much preferred pigs) but he's had to go back to sheep and cattle because at the scale he was farming (around 1-200 head of pigs) he couldn't make it pay (they cost more to feed than the pork they made). From what I've heard about the price of pork at the moment you'd need your head examined to move from fruit into pigs.

As an aside, my brothers pigs were very inoffensive to live next door to, no smell, virtually no noise, minimal machinery.

The only issue he ever had was a recently moved in neighbour complaining that the dust kicked up whilst hay baling a field was ruining his bbq.

[gothatway]

RTB said:

The only issue he ever had was a recently moved in neighbour complaining that the dust kicked up whilst hay baling a field was ruining his bbq.

Yeah, why couldn't he wait until it rained and dampened down the dust ?
(Parrots waiting)

[silentbrown]

RTB said:

Change of use from fruit bats to pigs won't be needed.

Quoted the way I misread it. Maybe bat guano is a lucrative business, but there's eff all meat on those flying rodents.

I blame the beer...

[Equus]

dickymint said:

“Britain’s great crested newts are facing a less certain future post-Brexit as ministers prepare to axe rights afforded to them by European legislation in a bid to speed up development projects.

So fake news, basically?

Great Crested Newts (and their habitats) will remain protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act, just as they have been since 1981.

The EU Habitats Directive is irrelevant (which is doubtless the real reason it is being axed, and the reason nobody else has even bothered reporting it), as it does not afford any protection not already afforded by the Wildlife and Countryside Act, and it wasn't introduced until 1992.

The Wildlife and Countryside Act said:

...a person is guilty of an offence if intentionally or recklessly—

(a) he damages or destroys any structure or place which any wild animal specified in Schedule 5 uses for shelter or protection;

(b) he disturbs any such animal while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for shelter or protection; or

(c) he obstructs access to any structure or place which any such animal uses for shelter or protection.

Back to Google, I'm afraid, old boy. Better luck next time.

[Murph7355]

I live next door to a farm (sheep dairy as its primary official role, though the biggest shift has been towards an "attraction").

Flies are probably the biggest annoyance, but it doesn't happen every year and it's relatively easy to deal with the majority of them using decent quality traps away from the house.

We have a fantastic relationship with the farmer and his family. As with any neighbour, I think this is probably the single most important factor.

He had to have planning permission for a new barn he wanted to build.

The noise and the smells are fine - I used to live right on the A316 so the noise of a few sheep, cows, ducks etc isn't exactly problematic. And the quality of the air out here in infinitely better than in the city.

There's a pig farm down the road (a few miles) and I'm not convinced I'd want to live next door to one. Nor a beef farm necessarily (one of those a similar distance away). But having them locally does have advantages

It wouldn't (obviously didn't!) bother me automatically, but it would all depend on the detailed circumstances.

[V8RX7]

I grew up in the Countryside and I now life a 7 minute drive away in a similar setting.

Where I grew up it was pretty much silent, where I live now I hear dogs barking, tractors, crow scarers, shotguns, irrigation.... it's not the end of the world but it is worth bearing in mind - never mind smell, noise travels without buildings to stop it.

The neighbours dog is 300m away and sounds like it's barking on my drive.

[smifffymoto]

I would imagine fruit is alot more profitable than pork and less work.
I would be mindful of what fruit is grown and how much insecticide and what is sprayed if the house is right next to the crop.