The Forestry Association of Galicia proposes that the reform of the Law on communal woodlands should reinforce the imprescriptibility of communal land.
The Forestry Association of Galicia presented its contributions this month to the Forestry Council on the Draft White Paper on the reform of the regulation of Galicia's communal woodland (MVMC), which is intended to serve as a guide to framing the reality of these woodlands before any legislation is enacted.
The document submitted sets out the concerns conveyed by the communities of common woodland in common ownership associated with the Galician Forestry Association throughout the long working relationship with them and, specifically, those gathered following the meetings held in Valadouro (Lugo), Dodro (A Coruña) and Ponteareas (Pontevedra), on the occasion of the start of the work to amend Law 13/1989 on communal woodlands.
The imprescriptibility of communal village woods
It is considered necessary to reinforce the imprescriptibility of communal village commons, following public statements in the wake of litigation over the occupation of village land for houses, industrial warehouses and other infrastructure. It seems necessary that the new text clearly establish that the neighbours“ immemorial possession of a communal woodland, duly proven, is not lost through illegal occupations or usurpations, ”and this must be so even if those occupations interrupt the customary pro indiviso use of the woodland by the community of neighbours," emphasises José Luis Campos, Vice-President for Communal Woodlands of the Galician Forestry Association.
“And therefore it is appropriate that the White Paper recognise, as Law 52/1968 did in its preamble, that situations of abuse and usurpation still persist affecting the extent of communal properties, and that it is the duty of the autonomous administration to safeguard and defend this heritage, which is a symbol of Galicia,” it concludes.
Compulsory purchase
One of the objectives of the amendment to Law 13/1989 on communal woodlands should be to strengthen the social function of common ownership. And to preserve this figure, the possibility of resorting to compulsory expropriation to occupy communal woodland or impose servitudes must be restricted and conditional, justifying the need to pursue that route without opting for an amicable agreement.
