Crofting

I almost missed a tiny snippet in my paper saying that there is to be a change in the crofting laws.

“The Crofting Commission is ending tenancies of crofts that are not in permanent use”

i.e. Crofts which are not in use will be taken back.

Well this is not new – it happened to our croft.

Many years ago, the family leased a small farm on quite good ground near the sea. But our ancestor was a younger son of many and had to leave.

He was offered a croft, the plot we have now. It is terrible land, high up, on the wrong side of a stony hill.

But he had no choice. He was also a stone mason and in 1835 he moved here and he built the little croft house where I am at present. Slowly over the years, he cleared the stones off the land all the way down to the river.

His family worked the croft until 1960 when it passed to an aunt who was a university lecturer.

Under the crofting laws at that time she was able to buy the house with a tiny patch of garden – but the farm land – the croft - had to go. 

Because she was not actively using it – it was taken away - just like that - and given to the neighbouring croft to use.

So this ‘new’ law is not new - just recycled.

Crofting law is very complicated.

Big land-owners hate crofters on their land because they have so many crofting rights.

Crofters hate the big landowners because of the way they often get treated.

The land further up the hill from us is common grazing for the crofters along our road.

It is also an area where the local estate has sporting rights to shoot grouse etc.

Up till now there have been no problems. Both sides have quietly respected the rights of the other.

But the elderly landowner has died and no-one quite knows who the land has gone to.

A young brash man from Essex, speaking estuary English has come on the scene, demanding to know from my husband and our neighbour - what right we have to be on his hill - and to get off it.

Oh Dear

The newspaper article was headed “Croft Clearance fury”

About 1819 the people on our side of the glen watched the flames, as the other side of the Glen and beyond was cleared. First the Duchess of Sutherland forced the men to enlist in her regiment and then sent them away.

Once they were gone the women and children were forcibly evicted by her underlings and their houses burned down – all to make way for profitable sheep.

Our side of the glen was spared, perhaps because the land was so poor. Or perhaps, as the rumour has it – one brave crofter took a stand and talked them out of it.

Anyway – this side is not going to be cleared of locals now

You can see how wars start!