Big J

What is their purpose? Helps to know what I'm cutting for when cutting

I'll be producing a bit near Chard, and should be able to do that before Christmas

I'm upgrading my small timber harvesting gear in spring, so I will have the Kranman P25B processor for sale then. It's a very capable machine, and ideal for first thinning.

I watch loads of TV, but don't physically own a TV set, and nor have we for nearly 15 years. Just use the laptop. With Netflix, Amazon Prime and various other ways of downloading just about any show out there, I completely fail to see why anyone would bother with Sky except for sports. I watch a lot, but it's principally because I don't sleep very much and I enjoy the escapism.

And another, this time a four star review from a person called "Tonys mum" I bought this a month ago and as a saw it's great but the pull on the starter motor is very stiff and difficult to start. Great product if you're very strong. I can't start it!

The reviews are hilarious: A three star review (clearly not getting the idea that a chainsaw isn't a stump grinder): I bought this to take out some hedge stumps. First half hour was great then I started to struggle to cut through them. Overall I am happy with it though

Backwards chain ?

Agreed. I like Ruth Davidson. She represents a sensible, moderate Conservatism that is almost extinct amongst the current flock of Tory front benchers. I reckon that the combination of being part of a party that she felt no longer represented her and the fact she has a young son meant that her heart was no longer in it. Once that drive and passion was gone, she was entirely justifable in her decision to stand down.

Please refer to my most recent post in the "Jokes" thread, where I made a whimsical contribution about Conspiracy Theorists.

But an election on what basis? The case for Independence would be made off the back of a clear manifesto proposed by the government in power, which would likely be the SNP. Are you suggesting the first thing that should happen is that an election take place to give the people the opportunity to vote out the main proponent of Independence in the event of Independence? To boot out the party that has been planning how to take forward an Independent Scotland for decades will possibly be given marching orders straight after acheiving it's single stated objective? I don't think that is likely.

I agree in part, but the population is dichotomous. On the one hand, you've a lot of people who work bloody hard, who show pride in their country and want to see it succeed. On the other, you've a lot of people who are very happy to sponge off the first group. The welfare class is larger in Central Scotland than down here in Devon. Any economy whereby the majority are supported by the minority is going to struggle to self sustain without external help. That being said, I reckon that the rise and subsequent dominance of the SNP is a reaction to the archaic feudal land ownership system. Half of all of Scotland is owned by just 432 land owners, and it has the most unequal land ownership in Europe. The SNPs socialist ideals aren't in themselves ignoble, but their implementation proposals and motivations are questionable. Scotland suffered over the course of the 20th century with rapid deindustrialisation combined with ill-fated social engineering (slum clearances). Even to this day, that desire to muck about with the social fabric exists, with policy being to tack bloody council houses onto pretty much every single village. Shipping people with substance abuse issues out of urban centres to rural communities in the hope that these communities will bring these people up, whereas the reality is that they just bring the communities down. Rural substance abuse is a big issue now. I don't know what the solution is, but Scotland has some pretty fundamental problems to address before the notion of Independence can be again considered.

Government Expenditure and Revenue in Scotland (GERS): 2018 to 2019 - gov.scot WWW.GOV.SCOT GERS estimates the contribution of revenue raised in Scotland toward goods and services. Every single table shows that proportionally, Scotland receives higher spending that it takes in tax. If by every available measure, Scotland is sustaining itself less adequately than the rest of the UK, who exactly is picking up the bill for that overspend? It would be much better for the Indy camp to just accept that Scotland has a dependency and lack of self sufficiency issue, and work to fix that before proposing Independence again. Much is made of the wealth of revenue that could potentially from come renewables, as well as the much lauded North Sea oil fields. But when it comes to the figures, Scotland has less than 10% of the UK's population and over 50% of the budgetary deficit.

To an extent I agree. There are lots of projects in the rest of the UK that don't benefit Scotland, but equally, Scotland is a much more expensive country to run, with more extensive funding in a broad range of areas. As such, the rest of the UK subsidises Scotland. If I were you, I'd forget the historic argument (it's irrelevant as the major historic injustices are now at least 25 years old), I'd forget the economic argument (because at present, there isn't one, with Scotland's budgetary deficit being huge) and I'd focus on the democratic deficit. The fact that Scotland voted to remain, yet is being forced to leave, the fact that the more socialist political landscape is contrary to the position of the Tory government that has been in power almost 10 years. Having lived both sides of the border in the past 18 months, there are big differences, but then no more than say the difference between Devon and Essex, or Newcastle and London. Scottish independence would be a disaster, but as I said, I have more empathy for the reasons behind wanting to leave.

Three conspiracy theorists walk into a bar You can't tell me that's just a coincidence!

Nutball, victim mentality opinions like these are probably the single largest hindrance to Scotland having any chance of being successfully independent. History is history and can't be changed. I could point out that Scotland bankrupted itself in the first instance due to foreign policy folly, and entered into the Union willingly and by self created necessity. But I won't point that out ? The only thing that matters is the present and the future. Presently, Scotland's economic outlook is pretty grim on account of a State dependency. The budgetary deficit is 7 times higher than that of the rest fo the UK * If Scotland wants to stand any chance of a bright Independent future, it needs to look inwards to address it's own, deep-seated socioeconomic issues, rather than simply casting the blame on those south of the border. I don't deny that historically, Scotland has had a raw deal, but that was 25-30 years ago now, and since then Scotland has had a better deal through the Barnett formula than the rest of the UK. I still think that Independence is totally unworkable, but with the Tory led clusterfuck that is English politics, I have more empathy for pro Scottish Independence voters than I used to. * Scotland's deficit seven times higher than UK as a whole last year | UK news | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM SNP says record spending gap of 7% of GDP proves need for independence

Scotland has an uphill struggle if it wants to get Independence, and I don't have the foggiest idea how they'd achieve it. Land and wealth inequality is a huge issue (most unequal distribution in Western Europe, I believe) but you can't simply take it off the rich and give it to the poor (as the SNP have suggested). Wee Jimmy from the Scheme isn't going to know how to look after, or indeed care about 3000 acres of upland moor. Scotland would certainly benefit from a dose of egalitarianism, but it's going to require a mindset shift from those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, whereby they take a lot more responsibility for their own actions and situation. Reducing their dependency on the State would be a good start.

I don't envy anyone in Scotland now. As depressing as it is down here being on the wrong side of the political will of the people (for all that that is worth), at least it's only a single question being asked. In Scotland the situation is doubly intractable. An EU referendum where the overwhelming majority voted to remain (62:38) yet are being dragged out against their will. And then the complication of a looming Indy2 vote where I think it'll pass. And then couple that with the fact that some who voted to remain in the EU want Scottish Independence and some that voted out of the EU want to remain in the UK. And then some that want to leave both the UK and the EU and some that want to remain in both. And then that the tradional political parties don't necessarily represent everyone, or even a majority of anyone falling into the four camps listed above. It's perhaps no more of a mess than what we have in England presently. But it certainly seems like a more complicated and lengthy endevour to resolve.

I don't think too many people get Transits for tax reasons, but so many people run crew cab pickups for that purpose. But I agree with your point about small load, short distances and short life of vehicles. I know I'm a fussy git when it comes to vehicles, but I've driven a lot of different cars and work vehicles over the years. Some are my own, but also whenever I go abroad, I make a point of hiring something that I've not had before. I've hired cars from crappy little Opels to a Mercedes S class and GLS. I just love driving. The reason I say that is that I don't think that the rate of improvement with pickups has kept pace with vans or cars. The little Berlingo van I have is as pleasant and comfortable to drive as any small modern car. It has great tech on it and was cheap too. The new pickups that I've driven (Navara, Ranger and Ssangyong) were all really disappointing, with cramped cabins, uncomfortable rides and sluggish powerplants. We would do well to take a leaf out of the American's book and offer a few pickups here that are both functional for work and comfortable too.

It wasn't half the softwoods! Though maybe if you include the clearfell areas it was. It's looking lovely now, if I do say so myself. You're a lucky man to have such a fine stand of douglas on your back doorstep. Oh, and some big ugly beech! ?

The V10 is a bit of a relic, sadly. No longer in production. The Amarok is one of the few pickups to have a decent engine (just over 250bhp, with overboost to about 275) but a sad fact is that the most powerful pickup sold in the UK is about 25bhp less powerful than the least powerful F150 (the baby of the range) sold in the US. I guess it's because 90% of the pickups here are sold as tax dodges, so power for load lugging isn't regarded as being important.

They are not cheap to fix when they go wrong, so a wise call I think. On paper, the V6 is sort of pointless when compared to the V10. You're only gaining 2-3mpg, but losing 90bhp. If you're towing, I'd bet the V10 is better on fuel.

Funny thing is that in the 80 miles I did in it today, I averaged 26.5mpg, and at the speed I was doing (motorway, plus some slightly heavy right footed A and B roads) I wouldn't have got much more than that in the Sprinter. I'm convinced it'll actually be better on fuel towing than the 313CDI Sprinter.

Right, we're sorted for vehicles The Berlingo van stays as it's awesome and it's my main work vehicle. The C4 Grand Picasso is being swapped for a same age, same mileage Seat Leon X-perience. It's a medium sized 4x4 estate on stilts. It's narrow for the lanes and has an auto box for my wife who doesn't like gears. Kathryn can also get onto my sites with it should she need to drop off parts or oils (happens pretty regularly). And I picked up a nice low mileage, one owner V10 Touareg today. It pulls like a train and actually looking forward to hitching a trailer up to it. I can't imagine any hill will phase it. So, hopefully, that concludes the (up to this point) neverending question of which tow vehicle to get. I shall report back on how we get on with the Touareg. First impressions (after driving it 80 miles today) is that it is incredibly comfortable and brisk. The cabin is so much better than in a pickup, and space for someone my height much better.

Lots of good ideas, and lots of food for thought. I think whatever uses can be demonstrated as being viable would vary from site to site, depending on the locality. It's going to be a fairly productive heavy scenario, so things like woodland burial aren't going to be compatible. I'm not keen on paintballing or motorsports as they are disruptive and antisocial, and they make a mess.

It's a bit of a hypothetical question, but if you had a woodland and you were looking for ways to diversify the income from it (beyond timber harvesting and carbon offsetting), how would you approach it, and what would you look to pursue? Hypothetical woodland is young broadleaf (20-30ft), fully deer fenced and private. Located within 20 minutes of a town. I had thought private dog walking, glamping pod, forest nursery etc, but I'd be keen to hear any ideas, if you don't mind me picking your collective brains.