Have the definitive regulations regarding firewood?

[renewablejohn]

14 hours ago, Justme said:

Travelling with a tractor with front-mounted attachment - Agriculture - HSE

WWW.HSE.GOV.UK

---

When on a public highway, the forks should be removed, folded back and secured or covered/protected by an appropriate...

 

 

QUOTE

Do not travel on the public highway with the machine attachment carrying a load, as this may contravene road traffic legislation. 

END QUOTE

 

So it might be ok & it might not.

 

Thanks HSE thats helpful.

 

 

 

Typical HSE garbage. Notice the use of the word "May"  You need to look on the VOSA site as their the ones who do the prosecutions.  The relevant legislation is in reference to insecure loads. There is no restriction on carrying loads on pallet forks but they must be secure. In practice for loads on forks that means the load has to be secured to stop side movement of the load and forward movement off the forks. I comply with both by securing the IBC container  to the headstock of the fork lift with the appropriate ratchet straps to strapping points. As my tractor is a reverse control holder it does not have a fore end loader and is not a telescopic materials handler therefore the notice is irrelevant. The forklift is actually attached to the 3 point lift and never runs with forks sticking out as the forks fold back onto the headstock for travel when empty.  If this HSE garbage was extended to implements attached to the front 3 point link on tractors then modern farming would cease.

[Justme]

9 minutes ago, renewablejohn said:

Typical HSE garbage. Notice the use of the word "May"  You need to look on the VOSA site as their the ones who do the prosecutions.  The relevant legislation is in reference to insecure loads. There is no restriction on carrying loads on pallet forks but they must be secure. In practice for loads on forks that means the load has to be secured to stop side movement of the load and forward movement off the forks. I comply with both by securing the IBC container  to the headstock of the fork lift with the appropriate ratchet straps to strapping points. As my tractor is a reverse control holder it does not have a fore end loader and is not a telescopic materials handler therefore the notice is irrelevant. The forklift is actually attached to the 3 point lift and never runs with forks sticking out as the forks fold back onto the headstock for travel when empty.  If this HSE garbage was extended to implements attached to the front 3 point link on tractors then modern farming would cease.

I think your mixing up an implement fixed to the front & a load fixed to the front.

 

I bet different rules apply.

 

HSE will prosecute in the event of an accident & possibly prior to one.

 

The police / DVSA will do so prior to one for sure.

 

Its a murky world for sure.

Well till you get stopped.

[openspaceman]

I haven't seen any definitive ruling on this. Wheeled diggers always seemed to transport extra buckets either in the front bucket or in the digger bucket.

[renewablejohn]

1 hour ago, Justme said:

I think your mixing up an implement fixed to the front & a load fixed to the front.

 

I bet different rules apply.

 

HSE will prosecute in the event of an accident & possibly prior to one.

 

The police / DVSA will do so prior to one for sure.

 

Its a murky world for sure.

Well till you get stopped.

Nothing murky about it. There is definitive rules about whether a load is safe or unsafe and if you abide by the rules its a safe load. Within the rules IBC cages are defined as a rigid structure capable of containing loose goods. For a load to be considered light it needs to be less than 400kg which an IBC full of seasoned logs will be well under that. So as long as the IBC is securely restrained to the headboard of the forklift there is nothing wrong in respect of the load being unsafe on the pallet forks. The only element then would be if the load made the tractor unstable but as already stated its deemed to be a light load as less than 400kg.

[cessna]

On 09/02/2022 at 12:28, Paul in the woods said:

Whilst some of the comments are a bit over the top it's a bit naive to think Woodsure would say anything else. They're getting plenty of cash from hard working folk and I would expect by now their advice to be a bit more accurate. From a consumer point of view they also seem a strange organisation as they appear to be a trades body advertising wood and an enforcement body.

 

The proof of the pudding will be how many unregistered traders are put out of business, my personal experience of trading standards has been very poor so I'll not hold my breath.

When I visited Woodsure, the smell/fumes  from the nearby  fibreglass factory or whatever it is was /is seem to be a polluting the atomosphere more that the smell of logs burning via a wood burner!!!!!!