§ Mr. HoyI beg to move Amendment No. 34, in page 24, line 33, leave out from second land ' to end of line 38 and insert: 570
'used as pasture ground on which the vegetation consists solely or mainly of one or more of the following, that is to say, bracken, gorse, heather, rushes and sedge, and land so used which is unsuitable for mowing by machine and on which the vegetation consists solely or mainly of grasses of poor feeding value '.We have reconsidered the definition of rough grazing ' in Clause 29 in the light of the helpful comments of hon. Members in Committee on this difficult point, and we propose to substitute this different formula.The new definition of rough grazing land is in two parts. First, we refer to pasture land on which the vegetation is solely or mainly bracken, gorse, heather rushes and sedge. I am sure that hon. Members will agree that pasture land comprising vegetation of this type is clearly rough grazing.
The second part deals with land on which the dominant vegetation is grass of poor feeding value. Most farmers will recognise grass in this category. But we cannot accept that all land covered by poor grass is rough grazing land and have therefore added the qualification that it must be unsuitable for mowing. Grassland will only qualify, therefore, as rough grazing if the grass is of poor feeding value and the land is, for example, too steep, rocky, uneven or permanently waterlogged to be mown by machine. This accords with the generally accepted idea of rough grazing land.
This is the first time that anyone has attempted to define rough grazing in law and I doubt whether, even with the help of the Committee, we have achieved a perfect definition. But it is the best possible and it should enable river authorities, who are responsible bodies, to distinguish fairly between land generally accepted as rough grazing and that which is not. Since the Amendment is designed to meet wishes expressed in Committee, I hope that the House will accept it.
§ 10.30 p.m.
§ Mr. GodberThe point of the Amendment is clear. We discussed the matter in Committee and some of us questioned particularly the reference to self-seeded grass. We think that the new definition has got away from the problem that there arose. It is an interesting definition, but I am sure that one could pick holes 571 even there. It is very difficult to find an adequate definition of something we can all recognise quite easily. Like some other things, it is easier to see than to define. This is a reasonable attempt, and I hope that it will prove satisfactory in practice. It is important in the terms of this Clause that we should have a fairly clear definition so that those responsible will know how to deal with these matters. I feel that the Amendment provides an acceptable solution.
§ Sir Frank PearsonI, too, welcome the Amendment. In Committee, it was found that the question of self-seeded grass raised many problems. One could have all sorts of grass which were not self-seeded within the category one had in mind. Though the Amendment is a very great improvement, it might have been better to have given up all hope of finding any exact definition of rough grazing, and to have come down to the statement that rough grazing is what is accepted by the custom of the country as rough grazing. However, I have no doubt that with the usual capacity of the British people to interpret somewhat doubtful laws in an intelligent manner. we shall be able to interpret this definition in a reasonable way.
§ Amendment agreed to