Have you thought what it means to re-use a grave?

[mynamehere]

Reusing graves is a new(ish) idea. Re-using Graves? A ceremony could be anything. It doesn't have to be a fixed concept of grave. The money could go to schools and clubs and benches and endless things and have the name of someone you want remembered.

Right now there is a phased roll out of Grave Destruction: Thousands of remains to be dug up at the Camberwell Cemeteries

www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/grave-cemeteries-destruction

The Camberwell Cemeteries are full. But instead of closing them with respect for the dead buried there, Southwark Council wants to excavate thousands of graves and fell over 10 acres of woodland to sell as new burial plots.

Do you have family buried in Camberwell Old Cemetery?

Is your family name on this list?

Allison Bryant White Bradshaw Macdonald Stone Butler Roe Bird Scott Greig Baker Haynes Snell Webb Perry Harris Taylor Poncett Hall Collins Hossack Minahan

These are the first graves to be excavated, to create an access road for JCBs and diggers to clear the first area of 2.5 acres of woodland at Camberwell Old Cemetery.

If your name is on this list and have family buried there, you have until 15th March 2016 to notify the Council and object.

Contact Cemeteries Manager Avril Kirby: [email protected]

Contact Diocese of Southwark Registrar Paul Morris: [email protected]

Contact Richard Hastings, Clerk to the Registry: [email protected]

Please also contact Save Southwark Woods to let us know if you have friends or relatives buried in the Camberwell Cemeteries: [email protected]

The Church of England can stop the desecration

The Diocese of Southwark has the power to reject Southwark Council?s plans as it is consecrated ground. To date, more than 700 individual objections have been received by the Diocese.

The Diocese of Southwark itself recently erected the Monument to the Unknown Southwark Parishioner, not at the Camberwell Cemeteries but at the new 40 acre Kemnal Park Cemetery under 5 miles away, where other Boroughs such as Tower Hamlets are investing in long-term burial land for all faiths.

Southwark Council?s burial plans not only destroy history and nature, but also exclude any burial provision for Orthodox Muslim residents ? around 44% of Southwark?s burial demand, who have to pay privately for burial outside the borough.

?Southwark Council?s plans would turn the Camberwell Cemeteries into NCP Car Parks of burial,? said Save Southwark Woods spokesperson Blanche Cameron, ?replacing wild woods and nature with sterile burial areas as seen at the Woodvale and Honor Oak Rec extensions.?

Save Southwark Woods is campaigning to preserve the graves, social history, nature and beauty of these inner city Cemeteries - and protect and rewild them as 100 acres of Nature Reserves like Nunhead Cemetery.

Please contact us if you are concerned about Southwark?s plans: [email protected]

Public notice in Southwark News

http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/public-notices/legal-camberwell-old-cemetery/

Image is graves at Camberwell New Cemetery

[email protected]

www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

@southwarkwoods

Facebook Page Save Southwark Woods

Watch the aerial video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b76wj7BO8yI

Sign the petition to save Southwark Woods https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-southwark-woods

[Sue]

Yet another thread? How many is that now??

[tomskip]

Honestly? If the grave houses the remains of someone who could not possibly be remembered by anyone now living (so, say, they died more than 100 years ago) then what is the harm?

[dbboy]

The full notice, to prevent any mis-representation

LEGAL ? CAMBERWELL OLD CEMETERY

NEWS DESK (07 October, 2015)

Notice of Extinguishing Exclusive Rights of Burial under the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1975 CAMBERWELL OLD CEMETERY

Under the GLC (General Powers) Act 1975 the London Borough of Southwark has been granted powers to extinguish the rights of burial in any grave which contains sufficient space for not less than one further interment, where such a right has not been exercised for 75 years from the date of the latest interment in the grave or, if there have been no interments from the date of the grant of the right of interment.

In order to comply with the Act the London Borough of Southwark hereby gives notice that it intends to extinguish the interment rights in respect of the following graves and to remove any tombstones which are present on those graves in accordance with s. 21 of the Act:

Square 89 Square 106

Grave No 11272 Family name ? Allison Grave No 28016 Family name ? Haynes

Grave No 13363 Family name ? Bryant Grave No 28055 Family name ? Snell

Grave No 14379 Family name ? White Grave No 28075 Family name ? Webb

Grave No 15772 Family name ? Bradshaw Square 107

Grave No 14934 Family name ? Macdonald Grave No 28274 Family name ? Perry

Grave No 10512 Family name ? Stone Grave No 28285 Family name ? Harris

Grave No 10524 Family name ? Butler Grave No 28290 Family name ? Taylor

Grave No 15786 Family name ? Roe Grave No 28804 Family name ? Poncett

Grave No 16828 Family name ? Bird Grave No 29408 Family name ? Hall

Grave No 16836 Family name ? Scott Grave No 29941 Family name ? Collins

Grave No 16807 Family name ? Greig Grave No 30326 Family name ? Hossack

Square 106 Square 108

Grave No 27893 Family name ? Baker Grave No 30293 Family name ? Minahan

The Council has also served notice upon registered owners of the rights of interment and on the registered owners of any tombstone affected at their registered addresses for these graves

The Council does not intend to extinguish the rights on these graves or remove the tombstones until 15 March 2016. After this date all existing rights will be deemed to be extinguished unless we have been notified of an objection to the extinguishment of the right or to the removal of the tombstone in writing by the registered owner of the grave or a next of kin with a legal claim to the exclusive right of burial in the grave.

Any tombstone(s) removed will remain the property of the owner and available for a further 3 months after 15 March 2016 Compensation is payable in accordance with subsection 21 (7) to any legitimate owner in respect of, and proportionate to the loss of rights of the plots affected provided that a claim is made within 6 months from 15 March 2016 If you are the current owner of one of the above graves or believe know the whereabouts of these families, please contact the Cemeteries and Crematorium Office, Brenchley Gardens, SE23 3RD.

Telephone No 020 7525 5600 Email [email protected]

[Jeremy]

100 years seems like a sensible milestone for 'reclamation' to me.

[JohnL]

Can't a big plaque be put up with all the removed names and dates listed (taking up a corner or such) ?

and the old graves documented and photographed.

[Mustard]

What happens to the remains in the graves?

[miga]

*removed tasteless joke*

[Earl Aelfheah]

how many threads?!

[nxjen]

"Reusing graves is a new(ish) idea."

Again, I'm finding these campaigners' idea of time bizarre. Trees that are 20 years old become "ancient woodland", a practice that was occurring in at least the 19th century in London is described as "new(ish)"

[Sue]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Reusing graves is a new(ish) idea."

>

> Again, I'm finding these campaigners' idea of time

> bizarre. Trees that are 20 years old become

> "ancient woodland", a practice that was occurring

> in at least the 19th century in London is

> described as "new(ish)"

I'm guessing they keep starting new threads because they don't want people to see all the posts on the old threads which highlight their attempts to distort facts.

JohnL, that's an excellent idea.

[nxjen]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> nxjen Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > "Reusing graves is a new(ish) idea."

> >

> > Again, I'm finding these campaigners' idea of

> time

> > bizarre. Trees that are 20 years old become

> > "ancient woodland", a practice that was

> occurring

> > in at least the 19th century in London is

> > described as "new(ish)"

>

>

> I'm guessing they keep starting new threads

> because they don't want people to see all the

> posts on the old threads which highlight their

> attempts to distort facts.

>

> JohnL, that's an excellent idea.

Yeah, they're really just making it up as they go along

[edborders]

Why this is important:

People who have a family member buried in the Cemeteries may want to know that the council is going to be digging up their loved one's grave - a plot they bought for eternity.

If Vodafone sold you a plan with "unlimited internet forever" and much later told you they would be stopping that, you would scream bloody murder. That is what the Council is doing here with the graves of your loved ones.

And everyone who wants to get buried there may want to know that they won't be resting in peace forever. Their body will be dug up in 75 years and the plot sold off to someone else.

And everyone who thinks of a cemetery as having old, lovely headstones may be surprised to find that in a few years there won't be any old headstones left, just regimented rows of new graves. These new graves waiting to be dug up in 75 years.

Lewis Schaffer

Local Resident

[ruffers]

"Have you thought what it means to re-use a grave?"

Yep, good idea.

Next question?

[Sue]

tomskip Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Honestly? If the grave houses the remains of

> someone who could not possibly be remembered by

> anyone now living (so, say, they died more than

> 100 years ago) then what is the harm?

No! According to edborders/Lewis Schaffer above, these are "your loved ones".

You love them even if you never knew them, I guess.

And "they" are not currently "resting in peace" in their graves, edborders. "They" are hopefully resting in peace in the hereafter, but presumably that is their souls or whatever you believe in, or don't.

I don't think a body rotting away in a grave can be considered "resting in peace", myself. There will probably not be much of it left to dig up, let alone for its restful peace to be disturbed.

[Jeremy]

100 years is long enough. Compulsory (compulsorily?) purchase the plot if that's what it takes.

It seems daft, archaic, and vaguely vain to expect a piece of land to be reserved exclusively for your dead body until the end of time.

[mynamehere]

The point is for you to think about it which is what the people who "click" on the post are doing.

If I were to put someone in a grave and have RIP chiseled on a stone I'd expect it meant RIP and In Perpetuity whether I was still around or not. What's the point otherwise.

And the reason I personally care is that Cemeteries are the last urban green spaces we will ever see or our children or grandchildren etc and they, for me, are the last chance to bring wild green to where we live.

And I care for a long list of reasons including climate change.

Imagine taking the ?9000 spent on a grave and giving it to something the person liked clubs and culture and hospitals or a bench or a tree with their name. The council is planning to cut youth services and loads of other things. Some of the young people in some of the graves are there because of "circumstance". So the council defends the right of people to go in and out of graves like a long stay parking lot but wants to cut money that addresses the reasons some young people end up in an early grave.

For me that's a problem. There's loads of in perpetuity graves 5 miles away and the cost would be negligible.

[HopOne]

Reusing grave space is very old practice indeed. In fact, I think this is what I would rather Southwark Council did than digging up mature trees! I would be in favour of an ossuary - it seems bizarre to me that anyone would expect to be interred for perpetuity in an inner city area.

[Loz]

It's been done for centuries, as anyone who has been to the Old Jewish Cemetery in Prague will know.

[BrandNewGuy]

mynamehere Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And the reason I personally care is that

> Cemeteries are the last urban green spaces we will

> ever see or our children or grandchildren etc and

> they, for me, are the last chance to bring wild

> green to where we live.

You should take a stroll around Green Dale, an oasis of wild greenery enjoyed by both people and wildlife ? and long may it stay that way:

http://www.friendsofgreendale.org.uk/

[PeckhamRose]

dbboy thank you for doing that post; that took a lot of time.

I think it has proven that the council can only do so much to find owners of various plots.

If you own a plot in a cemetery do you think to inform the relevant local authority when you move?

Are you sure anyone in your family would tell you before they die that they own a plot in a cemetery?

We have to take responsibility here.

[Sue]

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dbboy thank you for doing that post; that took a

> lot of time.

Great that he found it and posted it, but I imagine since it's the full text of a council notice that it was copied and pasted in one fell swoop aka a couple of clicks?

[dbboy]

Yes, I did copy and paste, however I did this as I am sick to the back teeth of the threads these imbecile tree huggers create about an over grown piece of scrub land that is actually burial space that the Council want to now use and which I totally support them to in doing so.

Not only do they purport to be anti-burial but also believe that graves in rows are wrong. This is how cemetery's are now laid out so it is easier to maintain the grass, and if you look at the new graves that have headstones put in place they look quite tidy. Just visit and take a look at some of the older cemetery's like Hither Green where the grass at times around the older graves are so over grown it is a disgrace.

If the Council Notice is read in full you will see what the Council are proposing to do, further more I have no problem with graves being re-used. Perhaps if this practice was used in Nunhead cemetery none of the problems of limited grave space would exist in Southwark. These scrub land tree hugger's twist facts for there own benefit and use emotive language in doing so.

As I have said previously if the tree hugging scrub land lovers want to enjoy wooded areas than we are more than spoilt for choice, lets start AGAIN with Sydenham Hill Woods that you can see from the Underhill Road/Langton Rise junction, Coxes Walk, One Tree Hill, Horniman nature trail, Horniman Gardens and Park, Peckham Rye Common and Parks and least I forget Brenchley Gardens and just almost a stone throw away is Crystal Palace Park behind Crystal Palace Parade. If you want more have a read of the very recent thread on countryside walks in Kent around Shoreham, (I always thought Shoreham was in Sussex).

Maybe the tree hugging scrub land lovers want to be cremated, that's fine be me, but just remember how much energy cremation uses, it's not very green friendly to do so, but I don't have any problems with that either. So for the umpteenth time can I suggest this thread is duly buried.

[edhistory]

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> People who have a family member buried in the

> Cemeteries may want to know that the council is

> going to be digging up their loved one's grave - a

> plot they bought for eternity.

The English graveyards I know sell limited period leases.

I own a 75 year lease on my parents' grave.

Do they sell "freehold plots" in hometown USA?

John K

[Sue]

Good post, dbboy.