Author Topic: Committee attitudes and rulings  (Read 4216 times)

uncle

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Committee attitudes and rulings
« on: April 22, 2014, 00:24:12 »
As regards "tidy" allotments I can't see that having a lot of rhubarb plants is untidy?
It does rather depend on the allotment secretary and the committee. Some are very "organised" people who cannot understand why other plots are not regimented like theirs (just look at their plots!) Others are much more flexible. The boundary between untidy and freestyle is vague and a matter of opinion. The secretary has to obey the rules laid down by the council but they can often be "open to interpretation".
Just ask for the secretary for the specific council rule that forbids what you want to do! If it's vague challenge it.

You've hit the nail on the head in terms of my situation. Our committee seems to be dominated by one individual. His plot is very tidy/regimented/manicured and he doesn't seem to accept a more informal look, hence his criticism when I let my rhubarb plants run naturally to seed. 

Here's another example - I took a small, quite young, cherry plant in bare root state up to my allotment in a plastic sack. I intended to place it in my fruit cage and prune it like a shrub. The manager guy noticed the cherry plant and said trees are not allowed. He didn't accept my argument that many trees can be kept small, as hedges or shrubs. It was my experiment, which may or may not have worked. He's correct insofar as the written rules states that trees are not allowed. It doesn't say why but I assume it's in case a preservation order is slapped on a tree, or roots cause damage to adjoining properties. So I planted the cherry plant in a large tub and hoped to grow it as a container plant. He reiterated that trees are not allowed and that includes anything called a tree, even if it's in a tub. Surely, this is open to interpretation, like you suggest. Would you say it's a reasonable ruling? Perhaps he could have checked with the Council to see if they minded but, oh no, that would never happen and his decision is always final.

digmore

  • Half Acre
  • ***
  • Posts: 220
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2014, 08:13:32 »
Hi Uncle,

Without getting drawn into an argument, you seem to have answered your own question with several valid points.

No tree's allowed means no tree's allowed on plot wether in the ground or in pots/tubs. If you join a cricket team you play cricket not rounders that's the rule.

Rules are usually based on common sense, historical experience or legal reason, asking for the reason for the rule will probably get you the answer, you may not like the answer but its the answer.

Manager guy/committee term indicates to me a little friction, if your new on the site chat with other tenant to see whats what. Or if long term tenant, get yourself proposed and seconded and with ballot, join the committee at the next site election and either change or accept the rules.

Digmore.  :wave:


goodlife

  • Hectare
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,649
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #2 on: April 22, 2014, 09:24:48 »
As regards "tidy" allotments I can't see that having a lot of rhubarb plants is untidy?
It does rather depend on the allotment secretary and the committee. Some are very "organised" people who cannot understand why other plots are not regimented like theirs (just look at their plots!) Others are much more flexible. The boundary between untidy and freestyle is vague and a matter of opinion. The secretary has to obey the rules laid down by the council but they can often be "open to interpretation".
Just ask for the secretary for the specific council rule that forbids what you want to do! If it's vague challenge it.

You've hit the nail on the head in terms of my situation. Our committee seems to be dominated by one individual. His plot is very tidy/regimented/manicured and he doesn't seem to accept a more informal look, hence his criticism when I let my rhubarb plants run naturally to seed. 

Here's another example - I took a small, quite young, cherry plant in bare root state up to my allotment in a plastic sack. I intended to place it in my fruit cage and prune it like a shrub. The manager guy noticed the cherry plant and said trees are not allowed. He didn't accept my argument that many trees can be kept small, as hedges or shrubs. It was my experiment, which may or may not have worked. He's correct insofar as the written rules states that trees are not allowed. It doesn't say why but I assume it's in case a preservation order is slapped on a tree, or roots cause damage to adjoining properties. So I planted the cherry plant in a large tub and hoped to grow it as a container plant. He reiterated that trees are not allowed and that includes anything called a tree, even if it's in a tub. Surely, this is open to interpretation, like you suggest. Would you say it's a reasonable ruling? Perhaps he could have checked with the Council to see if they minded but, oh no, that would never happen and his decision is always final.
There is still little 'gap' for interpretation...depending how 'the no trees' is worded in the rules....if it says "planted into ground"..well then there is not much argument left you tree not being planted into ground. Now that fruit trees are widely available with grafted small rootstocks, they are easy to new tenants to remove should they not want them on their plots and nor the trees will become issue of root disturbance or competing with light with neighbours..there is hardly any wasted ground space as clearance area from the tree trunk is only few feet.
Olden days there wasn't graft options like now. I'm lucky to have to 2x 50+ years old apple trees on mine...and luckily they were planted in such a position that they don't bother neighbours that much, but there is very little you can grow undernearth their huge canopies.
If this rule is not down to council but it is your allotments 'own' rule...I would keep low profile for now, wait to your AGM...and you can always propose rule change...in mean while get friendly with other allotmenteers and have casual conversations about it to see how others feel about it. Maybe there is enough of you who would want small fruit trees in their plots too...providing they buy them with small rootstocks.

Digeroo

  • Hectare
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,578
  • Cotswolds - Gravel - Alkaline
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2014, 09:50:45 »
What is the definition of a tree as opposed to a fruit bush?   

According to Wikipedia
Quote
there is no universally recognised precise definition what a tree is, neither botanically nor in common language

Quote
Trees are not a taxonomic group but are a number of plant species that have independently evolved a woody trunk and branches as a way to tower above other plants and make full use of the sunlight.

Not sure my dwarf apples are doing any towering.  But if there is no definition of a tree, then you cannot have one?!!!

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/news/stories/2009/feb/2009-02-Week-3/judgementgives

The problem with rules is that some people take the advantage and sometimes it is easier to enforce a simple rule like no trees, rather than cope with what type of root stock is involved.  We are allowed fruit bushes as long as they are small.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2014, 10:01:26 by Digeroo »

Bill Door

  • Acre
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Calne Wilts The builders put down clayish soil
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2014, 17:59:52 »
I am with digmore on this one.  It is good that the secretary is so decisive.  One day this attitude will be appreciated.  I accept that it was not what you wanted.  If you want to "open" the envelope you will have to do it by other means.  There are too many coach and horse drivers trying to blast through the "accepted" rules.

By the way trying to get the cherry in under your conditions may not help your case later on.

Bill

Borlotti

  • Hectare
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,483
  • Ryde
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2014, 18:14:24 »
I can understand why some allotments don't want trees.  They grow too big.  My fig/apple/Xmas tree and small shrubs from hanging baskets, over the 10 years I have had the allotment have got very large.  Luckily our site has many trees on it, and it is not a problem.  With the two fir trees I had to get OH up to tie a rope round them and pull them up when he reversed his van. The fig should have gone in a pot, but then my apple and pear tree are wonderful and are at the end under the big allotment trees so don't affect anyone.  I suppose it is just horses for courses and the rules have to be obeyed, like no bonfires at certain times.  Should have planted the mint in pots, but live and learn. First time I had a Xmas tree take, and wish it hadn't as it is now too big to dig up.

Digeroo

  • Hectare
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,578
  • Cotswolds - Gravel - Alkaline
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2014, 20:12:08 »
In some ways we are lucky because we do not have to be ultra tidy and my style is not very regular.  I think some of the old guard might have a fit if they saw my plot   However I do not like plots full of dandelions and I have one just up wind.  But I am very productive.   Some of my rhubard is covered with a plastic darek which stops it drooping all over the place and produces 4 ft long stems.

Rules is rules.  I suppose you have to try and stay within the rules.  Having someone who tries constantly to take liberties can be rather frustrating. 

In some ways I would like more rules like no dog poo, do not walk across other peoples plots, do not steal crops or tools and do not undercut the edge of the neighbours plot and no dandelions and do not put stones and weeds on the pathways and put your bonfire out when you go home.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2014, 20:16:18 by Digeroo »

Borlotti

  • Hectare
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,483
  • Ryde
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2014, 22:25:37 »
We have no dog poo, dogs have to be on leads, which everyone adheres too.  They are tied up when on the allotments, and then have their walk around the playing fields.  They learn very quickly, they have their mat/whatever and water and sit and watch.  I think people know that if complaints are made about dogs running about and pooing, they would get banned from the site.  Must admit I am guilty cause I should not encourage my lovely next door neighbours dog to come and say hello to me, and call him beautiful, not the owner of the dog as I got told off my his wife and I wasn't talking to the man, but the dog.  :sunny: :sunny:

Ellen K

  • Hectare
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,175
  • Loughborough, Leicestershire
Re: Committee attitudes and rulings
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2014, 08:26:24 »
To go back to the opening post, "no trees includes no trees in pots" is unreasonable.

Some sites have rules along the lines of "trees must not exceed 2 m in height".

I guess some committees are good and some are what my mother would call "little Hitlers".

 

anything
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal