Frank Smith Solicitors and poor ragwort information

 Today I am once again using this blog as an extension to twitter and giving my honest opinion of something that is on-line

In particular there are a set of claims that are made

Ragwort is an injurious weed. This means it is part of a group of harmful plants that has been designated by an agricultural authority as being harmful to agricultural or horticultural crops, natural habitats or ecosystems, or humans or livestock.

This is clearly incorrect. It seems they don't appreciate that these are NATIVE plants which are naturally part of the ecosystem. The term "injurious weeds" was introduced in the Agriculture Act 1920 and the word ecosystem didn't even exist then. It was first used by Sir Arthur Tansley professor of botany at Oxford in a paper in the journal Ecology in1935 which was FIFTEEN years later.

The term injurious here means as it means harmful to the interests of agriculture. It was introduced in to legislation in the 1920 Agriculture Act and the meaning is clear from the debate in parliament the general usage as attested from Hansard and even within the Act itself where it is used in the form injuriously. Si9nce these are native plants it is hard to see how they could cause harm to natural habitats and there is no reasonable argument that can be made to say that they are dangerous to humans.

There are 5 main injurious weeds in the Weeds Act 1959. These include Common Ragwort, Spear Thistle, Field Thistle, Curled Dock and Broad-leaved Dock.

Landowners have an obligation to control the spread of injurious weeds.

No they do not. This is misleading. The legislation just says that the minister MAY make an order. In the absence of an order there is no requirement for anyone to do anything.

 Failure to control the spread, especially if it poses a risk to livestock, can lead to legal action being taken against the landowner.

Legal action can be taken against anyone about anything. Whether it succeeds is another thing altogether. Ragwort poses no risk to properly looked after grazing livestock. At Knepp in the south of England they have ragwort densities of plants at 4 per square metre and there are no poisonings .Research shows that most of the seeds fall at the base of the plants and that seeds only normally travel a matter of years. The only problem is if the plant becomes incorporated into preserved forages like hay.

 Where the land is a protected site, certain eradication techniques may not be possible so advice should be obtained prior to carrying out any works.

A legal code of practice has been issued by the government to support landowners. The Weeds Act also empowers authorities to issue enforcement notices to landowners to control the spread of injurious weeds and can claim expenses back when an authority undertakes remedial works due to the landowner’s inaction.

This is again incorrect. The act allows the issue of control notices. The only enforcement available under the act is to prosecute if one of those notices is ignored.. There is not even a duty placed on government to issue those notices either.