COMING EVENTS

Forest Ship

This excellent poem by Liz Morgan was read at The Faddie by Maggie Clutterbuck

I be one of them Vorest ship,
And a story I've ta tell,
I reside at Speech House 'oods,
Ya know, them ones them tried ta sell.
" What bist tha gunna do old butty? "
Me mates all bleeted ta me,
"With all thic Vorest being fenced off
No roaming fur us u'll see."
Then along comes awld Richie bwoy
And all his merry mun,
Them put up a fight and saw um off
Them wunt come here agun.
Sa dus'ent wurry thee yuds ta much,
A lesson them ad ta learn.
Them got tha message loud and clear.
And when and done a u-turn.
I think it's zummet ta do with Hoof,
Whatever thic da mean,
I zin a placard up tha road
T'was handy fa me ta lean.
So I bist gunna have me a kip,
Among the ferns and twine,
Or I might decide ta lie in road,
I'm free, tha choice is mine.

COMING EVENTS

The Big Forest Picnic

Saturday 20th August 2011

A WWF event to celebrate forests worldwide

The HOOF Big Forest Picnic

will be held at

Beechenhurst Lodge

from 11.30 am.

Bring your own picnic

There will be a HOOF exhibition and an update on what is happening with the HOOF campaign.

Come and celebrate our beautiful Forest of dean

Download a Big Forest Picnic poster here

Warren James riots re-enactment enthralls members of Forestry Panel

On Sunday a small but enthusiastic audience witnessed a humorous re-enactment of the 1831 Warren James riots.

L to R: Roger Drury, Dave Morris and Pete Dunford

The re-enactment, originally to be staged outdoors but due to heavy rain held in Speech House, was written and performed by members of the Warren James Group.

Among the audience were some members of the Independent Panel on Forestry who had arrived early for their evening meeting with Forest of Dean “stakeholders” and other representatives, including members of Hands off our Forest.

They clearly enjoyed the entertainment as the audience cheered Warren James, hissed Edward Machen, the deputy surveyor sent to read them the Riot Act, and sang the Billy Bragg version of This Land Is Your Land.

Ian Wright, who read an account of the riots said: “This is more than just a history lesson. It is important to remember the riots of 1831 because the parallels with today are remarkable. Foresters have always resisted the enclosure of their forest, and the latest attempt by the Government to dispose of all of England’s forests into private hands shows that constant vigilance is needed to preserve the Dean’s hard-won heritage.”

Read a short history of the 1831 riots here

Forestry Panel wants YOUR views!

Forest campaign puts Forest of Dean first on panel's list

"We will represent the views we hear - that's what we have been asked to do," says panel chairman, the Bishop of Liverpool.

The Bishop said:

"The panel was unanimous that we should make the Forest of Dean our first visit, as we have received so many invitations. We realise its tremendous natural and

cultural heritage, and that local people have been active on forest issues for many years."

When the Environment Minister, Caroline Spelman, announced the humiliating Government climbdown over their plans to privatise the English forests - thanks mainly to the pioneering campaign of the people of the Forest of Dean - she also announced the setting up of an independent panel to report on the future of our forests.

That panel has now formed (see below) and their very first port of call is the Forest of Dean on 13th June..

The panel are asking for the opinions of the public, and HOOF, along with the Forester and Review are starting a campaign to ask that you, the residents of the Forest of Dean, send in your views to the panel, preferably before they visit on the 13th June.

The panel has formulated 5 questions that they would like the public to answer. For details how to do this see the box on the left. It only takes a few minutes and could make all the difference to the panel's decisions.

HOOF's own Owen Adams has an excellent interview with the Bishop regarding the panel's visit in the Forester - click here to read the full article (previously published in the Forester).

The Forestry Panel

The make up of the Forestry Panel to report on the future of English forests is as follows:

The Right Reverend James Jones - Chair

Shireen Chambers (Institute of Chartered Foresters)

Dr Mike Clarke (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds)

Tom Franklin (Ramblers)

Stuart Goodall (Confederation of Forest Industries)

Stephanie Hilborne OBE (Wildlife Trusts)

Sue Holden (Woodland Trust)

Dr Alan Knight OBE (Single Planet Living)

Dame Fiona Reynolds (National Trust)

Sir Harry Studholme (Forestry Commissioner)

John Varley (Clinton Devon Estates)

William Worsley (Country Land and Business Association)

Full details of the independent panel, including its remit and biographies of its members can be found on the DEFRA web site here

 

 DOWNLOAD THE FULL SUBMISSION DOCUMENT THAT HOOF SENT TO THE PANEL HERE

WORKERS at Bank House say Government proposals to slim down and dismantle parts of the Forestry Commission are “unworkable”.

The Forest of Dean branch of the Forestry Commission Trade Unions (FCTU) hits out at Government plans.

Later this month, Forestry staff will hear how many of its current tasks will be axed or transferred to the private sector, and how many of the 49 based at Coleford’s Bank House will remain, or be transferred to other jobs and locations.

The Government wants to see more commercial ventures within the Forest to add to existing attractions such as Go Ape, and more Forestry Commission visitor facilities to be run by private firms. The consultation document reveals some activities will have to shut down to meet funding cuts – including conservation work - and charges may be introduced for certain attractions that have always been free.

The Forest of Dean branch of the Forestry Commission Trade Unions (FCTU) has hit out at plans by its boss, Defra, in a response to a staff consultation.

The consultation document, called Shaping The Future, assumes the public estate will be smaller in the near future as the Commission prepares to shred up to a third of all its staff in England, and close many of its offices. Bank House administration staff may be moved from Coleford to Worcester, while those on the ground will have to juggle managing the Dean with other forests from Shropshire to Cornwall.

Forestry Commission director-general Tim Rollinson said the Forestry Commission has to forge ahead with its cuts programme, whether or not the public estate remains the same size.

Shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh tells HOOF steering group that she has been unable to find the source of the Government’s claim that the existing law allows it to sell up to 15 per cent by 2014.

Mary Creagh, Shadow Environment Secretary, meets with HOOF representatives (L to R) Ian Standing, Rich Daniels and Nigel Costley.

At a meeting of HOOF members at Beechenhurst Lodge she requested with theThe figure does not appear in the Forestry Acts 1967 or 1981.

The Labour frontbencher said: “I have come to the conclusion it was a lawyer with his finger in the wind who came up with the 15 per cent figure as being an insubstantial amount of forest. A legal challenge to this is a good idea.”

HOOF is also disputing that the Treasury can benefit from the sale of woodlands, saying the Crown should be the recipient.

Read the full article here

The first action of the newly formed Forest Campaigns Network has been to send out press releases to all the media explaining its demand for a seat on the Government Panel to determine the future of the public forests of England.

The press release said:

We have yet to hear of anyone with an interest in keeping our forests public being invited on to the panel – that includes our forests’ inhabitants and frequent users, and the half-million-plus people that have campaigned to keep our woods in public hands.

The full press release can be read here.

Rich Daniels, chairman of HOOF, was invited to speak at Saturday's March for the Alternative rally in Hyde Park organised by the TUC to protest against the government cuts.

Rich, a freeminer, spoke to the crowd of some 300,000 people about the HOOF campaign and how it was instrumental in bringing about the government's U-turn over disposing of the English public forests.

He began his speech by saying " Not only is the Forest of Dean one of the most beautiful and special places you are ever likely to find but it is populated by a people fiercely independent in mind and spirit".

You can see and hear his full speech here

Thousands of people were out all over the country on Sunday enjoying their forests, taking part in a wide range of activities to celebrate the government dropping their plans to privatise English public forests.

Baroness Jan Royall (centre) and Bill Hobman, ex Mayor of Lydney (right) were among many at Wenchford on Sunday celebrating their forest

In the Forest of Dean, people of all ages were out across the Forest enjoying the unexpected sunshine, walking, riding bikes and horses or just relaxing by the side of the river at Wenchford with a barbeque.

It was good, after the efforts of everyone in the Dean to see off the threat of disposal, to be able to relax for a while and enjoy the Forest we all love so much. But as HOOF has repeatedly warned, the danger is still there and we must contibue to be vigilant as the government panel deliberates on how best to run them.

The first action of the newly formed Forest Campaigns Network has been to send out press releases to all the media explaining its demand for a seat on the Government Panel to determine the future of the public forests of England.

The press release said:

We have yet to hear of anyone with an interest in keeping our forests public being invited on to the panel – that includes our forests’ inhabitants and frequent users, and the half-million-plus people that have campaigned to keep our woods in public hands.

The full press release can be read here.

Representatives of forest campaigns from all over England met at Speech House on Saturday 26th February to discuss how best to safeguard our forests in the future. The organisations represented at this historic event were:

• 38 Degrees (national)
• Friends of Bourne Wood (Lincolnshire)
• Save Cannock Chase (Staffordshire)
• Save Our Forests (national)
• Save Our Woods (national)
• Save Sherwood Forest (Nottinghamshire)
• Hands off our Forest (Gloucestershire)

Hands Off Our Forest chairman Rich Daniels chaired the day of discussions. In his welcome he expressed the need to “re-motivate everyone and tell them what’s going on. One thing that unites us all is the love for our forests. I hope we can start to work more closely together and form a campaign that helps us in the future.”

ACTION

Among other matters, it was agreed that the Forest Campaigns' Network should:

• Seek representation on the Panel being set up by the Government, and to protest loudly if our views were not heard.
• Maintain public interest with a Celebrate Our Forests event on 20th March
• Campaign to keep the Forestry Commission secure and up to strength

Other forest groups who have joined the Forest Campaigns' Network, but were unable to attend the meeting are:

Friends of Chopwell Wood (Tyne & Wear)

Friends of Hurn’s Forests (Dorset)

Friends of Thetford Forest Park (Norfolk)

Keep Our Forests Public (Sussex)

One Voice (New Forest)

Save Haldon Forest (Devon)

Save Sandlings Forests (Suffolk)

On Sunday 20th March, people all over England will be celebrating their local forest by visiting it and using it.

Whether you walk, cycle, ride, fish, bird-watch, or picnic in the Forest of Dean, get out on Sunday 20th and show how proud we are of our Forest.

There will be BBQs all day at Wenchford.

Cycle events are happening all over the country on the 20th. Here in the Forest of Dean, HOOF are planning:

A Roll In The Woods, with both morning and afternoon bike rides on two circuits – one for mountain bikers, the other for families, leaving Pedalbikeaway (Cannop Cycle Centre) - see below:

Cycling Events at Pedlabikeaway:

• 1030 – guided Mountain Biking tour of Forest – FREE
• 1100 – Trail Rides – 10 miles, 4 miles and 2 miles - FREE
• 1400 – guided Mountain Biking tour of Forest – FREE
• 1430 – Trail Rides – 10 miles, 4 miles and 2 miles - FREE
• All Day – Trail Rides - FREE
• All Day – Prizes for anyone in Fancy Dress
• Bike Hire
• Café Open
• Picnic at Wenchford (Blakeney Straits) All day – bring food
• Wear yellow

Watched by a jubiliant crowd, Baroness Jan Royall removes the last Hands off our Forest sign at Speech House today in a symbolic act to mark the government's complete "yew-turn" on forest disposals and the Public Bodies bill.

HOOF has always pledged that when the Forest was safe we would remove all the signs and yellow ribbons and return the Forest to its natural beauty.

The Forest may not be completely out of the woods yet, so to speak, as the HOOF statement printed below explains, but for the time being at least the threat to dispose of our Forest and all the other publicly owned forests of England has been removed.

Rest assured that HOOF is continuing and that this web site will still be here to bring you all the latest developments. As a contributor to the comments pages reminds us, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"

Cameron orders complete U turn

Forestry clauses in the Public Bodies bill to be removed

Consultation will be halted

Forestry minister Caroline Spelman forced into climb-down by Downing Street.

The prime minister has ordered Spelman to:

End the consultation on plans to dispose of the land in England run by the Forestry Commission

 

Drop clauses in the public bodies bill that would allow the government to sell off all of England's forests.

 

Establish an independent panel with environmentalists to reach consensus on reforms to improve access and biodiversity in forests.

In a move that has humilated minister Caroline Spelman - and left our local MP Mark Harper out on a limb - the Prime Minister David Cameron is ordering that the policy to dispose of English forests to private enterprise and charities must be dropped.

A No 10 insider said: "It's a cock-up. We just did not think."

The process started yesterday in the House of Commons during Prime Ministers questions when David Cameron, in reply to the question from oppositon leader Ed Milliband "Are you happy with your flagship policy on forestry" answered "The short answer to that is – no,"

Then, at 12.30pm today, environment minister Caroline Spelman read to the house of commons the statement we had all been hoping for - that the Government's ill conceived forestry policy would be dropped.

For the Forest of Dean, this is the third time in 30 years that we have had to fight and win this battle.

Naturally, we are pleased with the latest developments but we do not think this is the end.

We will press on to seek a permanent solution for the Forest of Dean, for the future of the wider Public Forest Estate and for the Forestry Commission.

We want proper protection from sale or transfer for all the publicly owned woodland in the Forest of Dean area and West Gloucestershire. The area shown as blue Heritage forest on the Defra map is a step in the right direction.

We also want it managed by the Forestry Commission. We believe that a permanent and positive solution must now be made to define and protect the whole of the public forest estate in England and the expert Forestry Commission staff that manages them. As the public has demonstrated, these woods and forests are regarded as precious public open spaces.

Its now up to the Government to recognise this and come up with positive proposals. Mr Cameron has mentioned the creation of an expert panel to look into things. We ask that some representatives are included from campaigns such as HOOF.

Caroline Spelman, in her statement to the House of Commons today inadvertantly let slip the government's true attitude to consultation.

Replying to a question asking her why the government had withdrawn the DEFRA consultation document, she said:

"Looking at the early responses, I think it is quite clear members of the public are responding in many cases to what they have read in the press or what they have heard rather than necessarily their understanding of the policy."

So now you know - they didn't like the way the public were filling in their form, so they pulled it!

The government announced today it wants to "re-examine the criteria" for disposing of England's forests, amid speculation it could herald a wider U-turn.

They said it will not now go ahead with the sell-off of the 15% of state owned Forests that were planned for this year.

This does not mean the end of the forest disposals and certainly not the end of the Public Bodies bill which allows future ministers to dispose of our forests at will; but it does mean, whatever spin may be placed on the announcement, that the huge public outcry against the sell-offs has had an effect.

However, this move by the government to reassure us that the forests will be safe in their hands could be no more than a ploy to mollify the many parliamentary opponents of the Public Bodies bill and to persuade them not to oppose the critical clauses 17-19 which deal with the public forests.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12428814

HOOF says:

While it is good news that the sale of part of the forest estate is 'on hold', we must carry on our campaign until we have defeated the forestry clauses in the Public Bodies Bill and ensured the Forestry Commission remains intact.

We must remain vigilant until our Forest is absolutely safe from any future sale, transfer or disposal.

And here is what David Babbs of 38 Degrees said today:

The government have announced they will pause forest sell-offs for a few months. It's a brilliant sign, but our forests are still in danger. If we keep working together, we can save our forests forever - not just for a few months.

The government is still going full steam ahead with changing the law to clear the way for a 100% sell-off. It looks like they hope the fuss will die down if they pause a few sales here and there - so they can press on with quietly scrapping legal protection for our public woodlands.

In the clearest indication yet that the government are preparing to drop the whole sorry mess that is the bill to dispose of English forests, David Cameron, in answer to the question "Are you happy with your flagship policy on forestry", told parliament during Prime Minister's Question Time that he was not!

He did not elaborate further but there is every indication that the government are planning to drop the bill in the near future.

"The question is not whether they're going to U-turn," one Conservative backbencher told a political commentator , "but how they're going to do it"

Source - Politics.co.uk

But a spokesperson for HOOF warned against complacency:

"The fight is by no means over - only by keeping up the pressure to maintain our Forest in national control under an unchanged and viable Forestry Commission can we be sure of defeating this destructive policy".

In a shock move yesterday, the government ordered the Forestry Commission to take down all signs on Forestry Commission land critical of their policy to dispose of the English Forests - including the Forest of Dean.

To avoid putting Forestry workers in an embarrassing position, HOOF has decide they will remove the signs that are on Forestry land themselves over the next day or two.

As far as we know there has been no such order regarding the yellow ribbons.

Signs are still available for you to put up as long as they are on private property with the permission of the owner or on roadside verges not part of Forestry land.

This heavy handed move, together with the news that his own prime minister no longer supports him (see right) can only further deepen the embarrassment that our MP Mark Harper must be feeling now about his calamatious campaign to dispose of the Forest of Dean to charity.

...while charities turn their backs on chance to run forests

Read the full story in the Telegraph here

Get up to date with the latest developments here

Read the full HOOF statement here

Click here

Note: it is possible to see all 4 parts of the meeting by clicking on the Newer button to the right of the video.

The Forester's video can be seen here

Jonathon Porrit, Co-Founder and Programme Director of Forum for the Future, makes it clear why our MP has got it hopelessly wrong in his bid to sell off our Forest. Read it here.

And also read a great article by Jonathon about the privatisation of our forests here

"Ministers have bungled the politics [of the Public Bodies bill, probably irretrievably. They have so many more important fights on their hands that they are crazy to expend precious political capital for a negligible economic gain, and perhaps none at all. If David Cameron is smart, he will get out of the woods quickly"

The Government's plans to sell off England's forests are a disaster in the making says Stanley Johnson.

Read the full story here

A group of about 15 HOOF supporters greeted their MP Mark Harper by singing the UK version of This Land is Your Land when he attended his surgery in Lydney prior to his meeting at Coleford Library.

Based on the original Woody Guthrie song, This Land has been given new words by Billy Bragg who has kindly given HOOF permission to use it for their campaign.

In its main leader the Times slams the Government's plans to sell off our woodlands. The editorial ends:

"Trees are more than timber; they are symbolic of the green and pleasant land we fear to lose....No party should be able to forget this, least of all one that calls itself Conservative".

AND INVITES OTHER FOREST CAMPAIGN GROUPS TO A NATIONAL PROTEST CONVENTION ON FEBRUARY 26

After careful consideration of the "consultation" document published by DEFRA last week, HOOF have released the following statement:

Hands Off Our Forest (HOOF), the campaign formed to keep our Forest of Dean publicly owned and run, is firmly opposing the Government’s plan to transfer our woodlands from being managed by the Forestry Commission to a charity.

We are resolute in our conviction that no one is better qualified to run our Forest, to protect our unique customs and achieve the balance between a working forest and public amenity, than the Forestry Commission.

While all organisations, including the Forestry Commission, should be seeking improvement, we believe no trust, charity or other organisation, however benevolent, can guarantee the access and freedom of the woods we all enjoy today, nor safeguard the Forest for the future.

The full statement that is being sent to national and local media and other campaign groups can be read here

In a brilliantly argued and passionate letter to the Forester, Rupert Bathurst, Viscount Bledisloe, makes it clear why the disposal of the Forest of Dean would be a disaster. Read the whole article here

"In nearly 40 years of observing government, I have never seen an effort to steal power from Parliament and the public on such a colossal scale," says Prof Tom Burke, a close adviser to three successive Conservative environment secretaries in the 1990s. The subject of his ire is the Public Bodies Bill, now undergoing a stormy passage in the House of Lords. Read the full article in the Daily Telegraph here

In a shock announcement Mark Harper MP has said in the press today he will be holding a public meeting at 7.00pm in the Main Place (the Library building) Coleford this Friday 4th February. He has always said he will visit us and tell us what the government's plans are in a public meeting - in itself hardly consultation - but to give the people of the Forest only a few hours notice and to hold the meeting in a venue that only holds a few dozen people is not treating us with the respect we deserve. Mark Harper is hardly living up to his promise - which is prominent on his web site - to represent the Forest in Parliament, not represent Parliament in the Forest. Quote from his web site: http://www.markharper.org "Our local MP, Mark Harper, believes that as your elected representative, it is his job to be the voice of the Forest of Dean in Westminster, not Westminster’s voice in the Forest of Dean." One HOOF supporter who was told of the meeting today said: "I can understand that Mark Harper is worried by the strength of opposition to the plans to dispose of our forests, but to behave in this way towards his own constituents is shabby" Alan Robertson of HOOF has sent a statement to the press to express his disgust at the way the meeting has been called. Read it here

Millions of trees will be threatened by disease under the Government's plan to cut Forestry Commission funding and privatise woodland, according to an internal document leaked to The Times. Read more here

On Sunday 30th January a group of determined walkers staged a mass "trespass" in Bircham Wood. Baroness Royall of Blaisdon and Councillor Bruce Hogan joined members of the Warren Jame Group, the radical history society, in a symbolic walk through the recently sold woods.

Full story and more photos here.

Whatever the pros and cons of the consultation document, the big issue is still the Public Bodies bill.

A huge vote of thanks is due to all our supporters who have been brilliant in putting the Government on the ropes and getting them to considerably water down their original sell-off proposals - but we must continue to do everything we can to get the clauses regarding the disposal of forests dropped; or at the very least a continued exemption for the Forest of Dean.

The Warren James Group are planning a walk to assert their right to roam on Sunday 30th January. There will be a short walk through Bircham Wood, which was recently aquired by new owners.

The organisers have asked that more able bodied people should park down on the Newland Road and walk the 300m up to Bircham Wood. There is only space for parking a few cars near the entrance.

Ian Wright, a member of the Waren James group, wrote the following:

"Come and join us and assert your right to roam in Bircham Wood, Coleford on Sunday 30 Jan 11 am. We plan to take a short walk through the wood to make it clear to the new owner that we believe this is our right.

Until recently Bircham Wood was owned and managed by the Forestry Commission, but was sold to a private owner several weeks ago for approx £160,000. The new owner should have registered their new property with the land registry but has failed to do so. They will not have to pay inheritance tax, capital gains tax or income tax on this investment.

The government is going to lose millions of pounds in tax revenue as a result of any woodland sell off, which over time could exceed the money gained from the woodland assets sold. The wood comes with full shooting rights. Roe and fallow deer are commonly found in the wood. Some of the wood is classified as ancient woodland.

We are planning to meet by the entrance barrier. This can be found by following the Newland road out of Coleford and turning right just pass the whitecliff quarry. OS 1:50,000 Map 162 Ref. SO563101. Dress code - skimmington"

HOOF cycle rally

The cycle rally organised in the Forest of Dean to protest at the Government’s proposed sell off of English forests attracted over 120 cyclists of all ages on Sunday 23 January

The rally was organised by Hands Off Our Forest (HOOF) campaigner Barbara French who said, “It is so important we make the public aware of this very real threat to the Forest of Dean and indeed all of England’s forests, as cyclists and horse riders will be among the worst hit by any privatisation”.

Rich Daniels, Chairperson of HOOF, told the cyclists that the Public Bodies Bill, clauses 17 -19, currently going through parliament, would give future Government ministers - of whatever party - the power to sell off the forests to private developers.

Although the Forestry Minister, Jim Paice, has tried to reassure the public that rights of way would be protected, he had to admit recently in Parliament that any protection would only apply to walkers, not to cyclists and horse riders.

In any case, say local opponents of the Bill, even walkers in the Forest of Dean cannot be offered protection as virtually none of the paths in the Forest are covered by rights of way legislation but instead are permissions and privileges granted by the Forestry Commission. Under any Forest sell off the Forestry Commission would almost certainly disappear.

The rally began at 12 noon at Pedalabikeaway, who kindly gave permission to use the cycle centre. After a short cycle ride to Cannop the cyclists returned to the cycle centre where national BBC News cameras were waiting to interview some of those taking part. Councillor Bruce Hogan told BBC’s Jeremy Cook that the Forest of Dean is not owned by the Government and so is not theirs to sell - it belongs to the whole country.

The rally comes at the end of a week that sees the Government reeling from a sustained attack on its Bill from many quarters, including celebrities, environmentalists and senior lawyers and constitutionalists.

The House of Lords Constitution Committee recently declared that the Bill "strikes at the very heart of our constitutional system" and Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, said the Bill needs “very careful reconsideration".

Lord Woolf, a former Lord Chief Justice, said the Bill is “of grave concern to the judiciary" and "constitutionally wrong" and The Lords' Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee decided that “The Bill would give ministers unacceptable discretion to rewrite the statute book"

A letter to last Sunday’s Telegraph condemning the Public Bodies Bill was signed by over a hundred famous and influential people including The Archbishop of Canterbury, Carol Ann Duffy, the poet laureate; Dame Judi Dench, the Oscar-winning actress; and Bill Bryson, the author and president of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

Other signatories to the letter include Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, the celebrity chef; Joanna Trollope, the author; Lady Helen Taylor, the daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Kent, Richard Briers the actor, Lord Rees, the astronomer royal, Tony Juniper who is special adviser to the Prince of Wales’s Rainforests Project, Annie Lennox, the pop singer, Sir Ranulph Fiennes, the explorer, and authors Michael Frayn and Julian Barnes.

And Save England’s Forests’ president Rachel Johnson, the writer and sister of London mayor Boris Johnson, said: “An extraordinary coalition of the Great and the Good has responded to the Government’s proposals to sell England’s forests”.

Despite all this nation-wide disquiet about the Bill and the threat to the Forest of Dean in particular, our MP Mark Harper still refuses to say when he will visit the Forest and face his constituents to explain his position and listen to their fears.

The cycle rally follows on from the very successful HOOF rally held at the beginning of January when over 3000 people braved the cold and snow to show their disgust at the proposed legislation. Visit www.handsoffourforest.org for more information.

Hands off our Forest campaigners and others from around the country joined Labour's Sir Peter Soulsby MP, DEFRA Select Committee and Green MP Caroline Lucas outside Parliament

See the ITV West Country Tonight report here

Husky Sled Racing supports HOOF

There was a HOOF information and letter writing station at the annual husky sled dog rally on Sunday 16th January at Beechenhurst

The organisers of the rally, Wydean Mushers, said:

I think we can safely say that as organisers of sled dog rallies we'd be dead against anything that might affect the access we've been given to use the forest, it is a great example of how the Forestry Commission has worked with a local group to improve access

The HOOF stall was very busy with hundreds of contestants and spectators signing the HOOF petition

Dozens of projects to restore ancient woodlands are likely to be abandoned under the Government’s plan to sell most of England’s state-owned forests, The Times has learnt.

The forests are expected to be privatised without any requirement to uphold the Forestry Commission's commitment to replace rows of foreign conifers with native broadleaf trees such as oak, beech, ash and lime.

The commission had planned to restore more than 30,000 hectares (74,000 acres) of ancient woodlands which were planted with pine, fir and spruce after the Second World War when timber stocks were low. Conifers create dense shade and inhibit the growth of bluebells, wood anemones and other wildlife found in deciduous woodland. Many of these plantations have reached maturity and are due to be harvested, creating the opportunity to replace them with native trees.

Wyre Forest in Worcestershire has 740ha of conifers which were due to be restored to native woodland. Other sites where restoration is now in jeopardy include Grizedale Forest in the Lake District, Savernake Forest near Marlborough, Wiltshire, Pencarrow Forest near Bodmin, Cornwall, Hempsted Forest in Kent and Mortimer Forest in the Marches.

But Defra is reluctant to reduce the sale value of the forests by adding conditions such as the type of tree that can be planted and whether they can be harvested. Conifers grow three times as fast as some native trees and are more attractive to companies likely to bid for the forests, including suppliers to new wood-burning power stations being built to meet Britain’s carbon reduction targets.

A Whitehall source said a consultation document on the sale, due to be published this month, would ignore the question of restoring ancient woodland. It would contain a commitment to preserve the “public benefits” of existing native woodland but be silent on the commission’s plans to expand them.

The Woodland Trust said the value of each hectare would be cut by a third if any future owner was required to plant native trees. The amount raised from selling the 30,000ha could fall by more than £100 million. But the trust said that the Government should consider the wider benefits of restoring ancient woodland and not just focus on maximising the proceeds.

Sue Holden, the trust’s chief executive, said: “If the Government is determined to be the greenest government ever then it has to find a way to secure the future of the ancient woodland sites planted up with conifers over the last 60 to 70 years, which it currently owns. Ancient woodland is our richest and most fragile habitat, our equivalent of the rainforest. [Selling the sites] with no means of securing their restoration would mean a massive opportunity would be lost, probably for ever.”

Environmental groups are also concerned that new owners might try to discourage people from visiting the forests. Under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act, there is a permanent right of access on foot to land owned by the commission. But that does not extend to horse riders and cyclists.

The commission is also concerned about the future of its visitor facilities, including 413 car parks, 28 visitor centres and 177 waymarked walks. It fears that future owners will close car parks and other facilities and let trails become overgrown.

The following letter has been sent by The Wye Valley & Forest of Dean Tourism Association to the minister responsible for our forests:

The Public Bodies Bill currently being debated in the House of Lords will give the Government (and future governments) the power to sell the whole or parts of the Royal Forest of Dean: Clause 17.

Those of us who live in the Forest oppose the sale as a change of ownership will violate the traditions and privileges we and visitors to the Forest enjoy; it will destroy all that we hold dear about the Forest and will damage the local tourist industry and the local economy.

The Wye Valley & Forest of Dean Tourism Association has 300 members in and around the Forest of Dean and at a recent meeting we unanimously agreed to oppose the proposals affecting the Forest. Tourism is probably the most important industry in the area and the Forestry Commission does an excellent job in managing this unique and historic forest for the benefit of both visitors and residents.

We believe that you should exempt the Forest of Dean (together with those woods described by Lord Mansfield in 1981 as the contiguous woodlands commonly regarded as part of the Forest of Dean, namely, Highmeadow, Clearwell and Hope Woods) from the power of disposal contained in Clause 17 of the Public Bodies Bill.

John Bosley for Committee

Read full article in The Independent here

The article specifically mentions the Forest of Dean and Mark Harper MP.

Read the full article here

Read here

An amazing turnout of over 3,000 people braved the cold and snow to take part in the HOOF protest against the privatisation of our Forest.

One protester said "There are even more people here than were at the Save The Dilke rally, a battle which we won".

See a video of the event by Woodrow Morris here

After a walk through the Cyril Hart arboretum the protesters heard impassioned speeches from Baroness Royall of Blaisdon, Jonathon Porrit of Forum for the Future, the Bishop of Guildford and many others.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon "We cannot and we must not allow our Forest to be sold. Don't wait for the consultation that is promised - act now!"

Jonathon Porrit. "Maybe this is the defining moment, the point when people say ' This is not right, this is not the way to proceed' ".

Dick Brice, Asha Faria-Vare and other musicians entertained the crowd. The grand finale was the ritual burning of a wooden statue of Big Ben.

There are some great pieces about the rally in The Guardian 4th Jan and 5th Jan plus photos

Nearly £1,000 in donations was raised for HOOF at the rally - thanks everyone for your generosity.

"For reasons I don’t quite understand, Mark Harper has chosen to antagonise his constituents from the very start. He’s attempted to characterise them either as lacking the intellectual wherewithal to understand the essence of the Government’s proposals, or as a ramshackle bunch of ranting lefties". Jonathon Porrit in his blog about the rally. Read it here

There is a YouTube video of some of the rally here

Read excerpts from some of the speeches here

Or hear the speeches at Triangle FM here

Excerpts from the speeches:

Rich Daniels:

“We’re a broad church of people who’ve come together to save our Forest.

“It’s our turn in history to pick up where others have left off to save our Forest.

"What we are not is a political group, and we would oppose any political party that was attempting to sell our Forest.

“The spirit of Warren James is alive and well and is in the Forest today".

Baroness Jan Royall:

“We are here to defend our ancient privileges and customs.

“We’re standing in the middle of a glorious forest that belongs to us. We cannot and must not allow our Forest to be sold.

“We are involved together because we love the Forest. The White Paper might be a very splendid document that contains many safeguards for the Forest of Dean – but it will be too late. Normally the Government publishes a Green Paper and invites consultation before publishing a White Paper. In this case we have a Bill going through Parliament and then a White Paper. I think I’d call this arse over tit. Where was the green paper and where was the consultation? What this topsy-turvy situation means is that no matter what the White Paper may say, the Public Bodies Bill means the Forest of Dean along with all the other forests may be sold – it’s there in black and white. I don’t want to be part of a social or community enterprise owning the Forest, because you and I already own it. I want to thank the 49 employees of the Forestry Commission in Coleford and say we want them to keep their jobs.

“The Countryside Rights of Way Act will not, for example, prevent any landowner from desecrating Dymock daffodils. While I grew up going there regularly, I didn’t realise they are of real significance, as are the oak trees growing there. They must be protected.

"Our Forest is unique, it’s a special case. The canopy of this Forest allows unique ecosystems to flourish and if it were sold and managed in a different way the balance of those fragile ecosystems would be changed to the detriment of the whole. Our Forest is an economic asset, not only in terms of timber but to our local economy. Don’t wait for the consultation that’s promised: act now! We have fantastic support but we need more. I hope our MP Mark Harper will be able to persuade the Government to accept our amendment that I am tabling with the Bishop of Gloucester and Baroness Fritchie, and if he doesn’t I have to ensure the Coalition carries that amendment – that’s why your letters are so important. So get writing to our MP and especially those councillors who didn’t have the balls to sign up to that resolution from Andrew Gardiner, which was adopted at the last council meeting. I need to be able to demonstrate to the Government that the campaign to keep the Forest in public ownership is serious and got massive public support, as we can see today. Go for it, and campaign, and we will win”.

Jonathon Porritt:

“I feel honoured to be invited here to support the Forest and to ensure the Government’s irresponsible, insane plans do not go ahead.

"Do not be seduced by the siren words of Mark Harper, the forestry minister, or anyone else in this Government when they tell you everything will be alright once you get to see the White Paper. That is just a whole farrago of lies, lies and lies.

"We know what the intention of this Government is – they’ve made it very clear. They would like to see as much of the public forests estate as possible sold off into private hands as fast as possible, with as speedy a receipt coming back to the Treasury as possible.

"Every time they talk about forestry they mention the civil society and Big Society in the same breath. We know that this idea of selling off little packets of land to voluntary and community groups makes no sense whatsoever. The Forest of Dean is a whole, an entity in itself, a living, breathing organism which you can’t just parcel off into little bits and expect that those in charge of managing those little bits will understand the value of the whole. It is extraordinary that we have a Government that still doesn’t understand the basics of land management at that very fundamental level.

"We don’t have any basis on which to trust anything we hear from this Government at the moment. This kind of rally and expression of public anger is a way of showing Mark Harper and his Government that they shall not move forward with this proposal.

"The fuel protests of 2000 serious destabilised the Labour Government at that time – I didn’t support those protests but that was a defining moment. Maybe this is a defining moment: the point at which people say this is not right, this is not the way to proceed

"If this campaign in the Forest of Dean becomes the symbol of rethinking what we want from our Government, it’ll be a great deal more powerful than what Mark Harper and his colleagues currently believe

"I just feel very empowered to be part of this. I’ve spent 35 years of my life campaigning for one cause or another, some unwinnable and some winnable. All I know is this is a campaign that has at its heart the integrity and spirit of a massively powerful group of people which will undoubtedly win the day. All power to all of our elbows!”

Dick Brice:

“Our elected representative in London is our elected representative. Foresters are decent, kindly and generous but they have one fault: they do bear grudges, and Mark Harper had better bear that in mind.”

Ian Waddell, Unite's national rural officer:

“The 49 Forestry Commission workers have had a very uncertain and difficult time over Christmas and New Year.

"It’s quite clear that the clauses in the Public Bodies Bill are about selling the whole of the public forestry estate. The Forestry Commission doesn’t need to be sold off, it needs to be strengthened and expanded.

"The Government must be held to account. One thing is clear, we need to turn our anger and outrage into action.

"The Government is vulnerable: we want Mark Harper to be the first MP to be recalled when the recall law is passed. The Government is weak, and this campaign is about hanging on to the Forest for our children and our children’s children. we can win – we will win".

Bishop of Guildford, the Rt Reverend Christopher Hill, who has lived in Ruardean for four years:

"All the arguments used by Lord McNair in the 1981 debate are still relevant today. The Government of the day changed its mind and said the Forest of Dean is unique and should not be sold, and that’s why I will be supporting Baroness Royall’s amendment.

"The Forest of Dean has had its ups and downs. At least twice in the past 400 years the Forest has almost been destroyed because of individualistic, uncontrolled economic forces. The likelihood of individual parcels of the Forest being sold off is very high if the Public Bodies Bill goes through unamended. We need to support this campaign so the Forest can go on for another 400 years and more.”

Eric Morris, Freeminers' Association:

“The representative in Parliament we have now doesn’t respect freeminers. If you want to keep freemining and any other custom, go against this sell-off.”

Henry Mills, Commoners' Association:

"I'm very pleased to see so many people here supporting this campaign."

The five artists pictured are playing the January 3 rally and all are contributing tracks for a HOOF fundraising CD.

Mike Edwards, who is co-ordinating the album of protest songs said:

"I see the HOOF campaign as a pivotal point in the Forest’s long and chequered history.

If we, the musicians, artists and ordinary people of the Forest can make politicians and big business sit up and take notice of our collective opinion, then we’re actually being what the Coalition Government wants us to be – A Big Society, not scared to voice our views and have a say in the issues of our time.

The CD album will be varied in musical styles, but it will carry an important message – that we cannot afford to lose the land in which we live to commercial exploitation, at the cost of our quality of life.

I sincerely hope that Mark Harper buys a copy and listens carefully to every word and note on it."

Below we reproduce the press release that Mark Harper has just released together with angry reaction from Baroness Royall of Blaisdon, Nigel Costley of HOOF and Owen Adams, journalist.

Mark Harper, MP for the Forest of Dean, speaking ahead of a planned HOOF rally in the Forest of Dean on 3rd January said:

“Early in the New Year the Government will publish its plans for the public forest estate including the Forest of Dean. I have discussed this issue with the Forestry Minister and he is very clear about the importance of protecting the Forest of Dean. Neither I, nor the Government, have any intention of doing anything that would damage our Forest. I am confident that the plans set out in the White Paper will properly protect the Forest of Dean.

However, I am not surprised that the political opponents of me, my party and the coalition Government refuse to accept or believe the clear assurances that I have given on the contents of the White Paper and the Government’s plans for the Forest of Dean.

Much of the speculation in the media is simply not true. For example, there are not and never have been any plans to sell off the Forest of Dean to developers who would cut down the Forest to replace it with recreation parks. All that has ever been proposed is whether a local not for profit organisation, a charitable trust say, might be able to involve local people more closely in the ownership or management of the Forest of Dean. I think that is at least worth looking at.”

In reply, Baroness Royall of Blaisdon, Labour leader of the House of Lords, writes:

Both Mark and the Minister might be clear about their plans for the Forest but (a) they have not told us, (b) they have not consulted on them and (c) this is not what is said in the Public Bodies Bill which will enable the selling off of the Forest of Dean.

They should have published the White Paper and had a consultation BEFORE legislation was introduced to Parliament. Everything the Minister has said about forestry points to the fact that he wants to sell them off.

Notwithstanding this statement, we have to seek amendment to the Public Bodies Bill in order to ensure the protection of our Forest. If Mark is sensible, he will ensure that the Government accepts the amendments that I am tabling together with the Bishop and Rennie Fritchie. He could then take some credit for having persuaded the Governmentt of our case.

The key point is that proposals in a White Paper are not law: the Public Bodies Bill will be the law when it gets Royal assent.

Owen Adams writes:

Mark Harper deliberately misses the whole point. I don't recall the media (well us in the Forest anyway) have ever speculated the Forest would be cut down to make way for recreation parks. And as we can see from the leaked draft consultation document, a not-for-profit company is NOT all that's been proposed - there are five options...

Finally, he seems to be ignoring that out of the thousands of people who are supporting our campaign, some of them voted for him...

Nigel Costley, Regional Secretary, South West TUC and HOOF officer writes:

Mark Harper and the local Conservatives ask that we ignore the clear statements of intent by ministers to sell-off the forest and to trust that it will be alright in the end! Diana Edwards, Tory Deputy Leader of the Forest of Dean Council seems hardly convinced herself when she says: “If it is the case that it won’t be protected, Foresters can rest assured we will do everything we can to take action. But we have had the assurance of our MP Mark Harper and I’m sure he knows what he is talking about.

” Oh well, that’s ok then!

Faith in the local Conservatives was hardly bolstered when their local leader, Peter Amos said: “It doesn’t matter who owns it as long as it stays in public ownership.”

With the Public Bodies Bill going through Parliament now, we are asked to trust in a White Paper that will set out a range of options for the future of the Forest. None of them will adequately safeguard the Forest of Dean as it is now. All of them signal the end of publicly owned and managed forests.

It will be 50 ways to leave your lover when we haven’t even fallen out! ‘None of the above’ will not be on the list and such an option will only be achieved by amending the Public Bodies Bill now.

The Government’s approach is based upon the premise that public ownership of our woodlands is bad – despite all the evidence to the contrary. So how can we trust our local MP who has so far handled this issue so badly.

It remains unclear how the government will determine which options for which forests will be applied. The break-up of the national estate will mean that the more profitable forests will be sold leaving the rest even more dependent upon subsidy or even more at risk from measures to cut costs.

Even Mark Harper realises that talking about privatising the Forest is political suicide so instead we are presented with the option of a transfer to a community interest body or a ‘not-for-profit’ business. But these will still have to cover their costs. Not-for-profit is also Not-for-loss. The only way to balance the books will be more commercial activities, big hikes in fees and charges alongside cuts in woodland management.

I am a keen supporter of social enterprise and mutual alternatives to private business. But under the Conservatives, there has been a cynical distortion of their values to privatise public services. Once transferred out of public ownership there is no way back. As we are witnessing in the NHS, many of these bodies seem almost set-up to fail. When they do, the next inevitable step is into corporate ownership.

If Mark Harper thinks we are going to see his promised White Paper and wonder what all the fuss was about he is mistaken. If he thinks the Forest community are going to trust some vague assurances wrapped up in the twisted use of language he does not understand the voters of the Forest of Dean.

Hands off our Forest. It must remain in public ownership and management.

"Not some of them, nor most of them – the whole lot"

The Guardian Environment blog thinks the plans to sell off all state-owned forests are unwarranted, unwanted and unworkable - read it here

Anyone who claims there is no proof of sell-off plans and we should relax, sit back and "wait and see" only needs to be referred to the evidence given by Minister Jim Paice... here are some excerpts from Hansard (with the particularly pertinent bits - in my view - in bold):

The Select Committee on Select Committee on the European Union

Agriculture, Fisheries and Environment Sub-Committee

Inquiry on

FORESTRY

Evidence Session No. 1. Heard in Public. Questions 1 - 33

WEDNESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2010

11 am

Witnesses: Mr Jim Paice, Mr David Howat and Mr Robin Mortimer

JIM PAICE: The Forestry Commission is in the Public Bodies Bill to provide us with the opportunities for changes which, I am more than happy to admit, are not fully formed in our minds. But this is the opportunity to get the legislation because the Forestry Acts are very restrictive. For a start, they require the Forestry Commission to own and manage the public forest estate…

… while we are working on the thought processes as to how to reform the Commission and its landholdings, it is in the Bill as an opportunity to provide the legislative base to make those changes, whatever they may, or may not, be…

On the impact on the Commission, it is clearly a matter for the Commission to adjust its staffing levels, and so on. I need to make it clear that we are not proposing to abolish the Forestry Commission or anything like that. Clearly, however, if we go down the road of significant disposals, that will have an impact in its establishment and how it goes about its work…

… we need to focus the Commission much more on an enabling role and move it away from managing a significant part of the forest estate in England.

We do not have any hard and fast proposals about disposals at this stage. We will be publishing a consultation document in the early part of the new year, when we intend to lay out a range of options. We will by then probably have it down to one or two favoured options, but there will be a range. Obviously, the extremes are, at one end, the total sale of the Commission list as private forestry estate to some other body such as a charitable trust, or whatever. The other extreme is a piecemeal sale over a period of time to the highest bidder of individual parcels of woodland or forest. I do not particularly want to be drawn on the rights and wrongs of any of those options at this stage, because, frankly, we are not at that stage yet.

Lord Cameron of Dillington: As you know, Minister, the Public Bodies Bill is going through this House at the moment. Most of us are slightly mystified by Clauses 17 and 18 on the Forestry Commission. Reading between the lines of what you say, your present intention is to have a disposal of a part, or a considerable part, of the Forestry Commission lands. I would personally not disagree with that. I think a lot of that land would probably be better managed in private hands than public hands. However, you seem to be saying to us legislators, “We are not quite sure what we want to do with the Forestry Commission, but we want you to give us permission to do it anyway”. I find that quite strange. I wonder if you have slightly firmer views as to where you are going here.

Mr Jim Paice MP: Yes, indeed. Part of our policy is clearly established: we wish to proceed with, to correctly use your word, very substantial disposal of public forest estate, which could go to the extent of all of it. As I said earlier, the precise detail of who it will go to and in what form is yet to be decided. However, we are committed to the principle that protecting the range of public benefits–biodiversity, access, carbon fixation–and to achieve the increasing tree cover that I seek does not necessarily require the state to own the forestry. I take this opportunity to emphasise that we have absolutely no intention of reducing any of the protections that exist. Indeed, part of the consultation will be on whether other protections will be necessary. Felling licences will still be in place. All this nonsense we have read about golf courses and holiday camps on the forest is all complete and utter bunkum. It just will not happen.

In order to have substantial disposal, we need to change the law. Our lawyers advise us that up to about 15% of the forest could be sold without risk of transgression of current

legislation, which requires the Commission to own and manage the public estate. To get beyond that, we would need to change the law. That is the reason for it [the Public Bodies Bill].

The Earl of Arran: Following on from Lord Cameron’s question, in the event of the disposal of some of the Forestry Commission land, do you have any worry about foreign purchases?

Mr Jim Paice MP: I have worries about two or three potential aspects of disposal, which we are looking at very carefully. Foreign purchases are one, although I not think that they are automatically necessarily bad. Indeed, we could not prevent them under EU law. I am much more concerned about the possibility of established forest being bought by energy companies who would proceed to chip it all for energy recovery. That is not, in my view, a very good use of prime timber. We will need to look at how we prevent that.

The other aspect that concerns me is the point made by the British processing sector, mainly the saw mills, whereby, although the Forestry Commission has only 18% of English forest land, it comprises the vast bulk of their raw material. They have long-term contracts of supply, and it enables them to continue to process in good times and bad, when, perhaps, the private sector might stop felling when prices are low. I am very conscious that there are issues in our proposals that we are looking to address

The Earl of Dundee: The drift of my question was rather more that, given that there are targets, let us assume that, as custodians, the private sector will deliver and meet them. In the first place, which range of incentives do you think might work best to encourage the private sector to take on Forestry Commission land?

Mr Jim Paice MP: First, all the inquiries I have made suggest that there is ample interest in the private sector to take it on. For a long while, I laboured under the impression that, like the previous Government’s gold sales, if you unloaded them all at once you would end up with a seriously devalued price. I have been disabused of that by a number of different forestry investment operations. They think that it would be possible, if we chose to go down that route, to dispose of the whole thing at a sensible market price. But, as I said, we have not necessarily chosen that route.

Baroness Howarth of Breckland: Following up something you said earlier on this which I do not have clear in my mind, you mentioned a number of issues that were of concern to you; for example, energy companies buying large parts of forests and chipping in order to gain energy. There were one or two other issues that you were passionately concerned about. If there is a lot of interest, are you sure that you will able to avoid those kinds of traps and difficulties to those who are going to buy, particularly in the light of your wish to reduce regulation?

Mr Jim Paice MP: It would be a brave politician who guaranteed anything, but we are determined to do our very best to retain that protection. The chipping issue, which I genuinely feel is a concern, can be addressed.

The Earl of Dundee: If I might just pick up on Lord Carter’s point, if we go along with Sir David Read, who recommended trying to achieve 16% of forestry, let us begin with identifying best practice for incentives for the private sector to afforest, to plant new trees. Then, with the new plan to enable the Forestry Commission to sell off its assets, it follows that the energies of the Forestry Commission can be directed towards afforestation to a far greater extent. If you take these two things, a new vigour in our public body and identifying what works best for our European partners to activate the private sector, perhaps we then have quite a good model for best practice.

Mr Jim Paice MP: I entirely agree with you. I said at the beginning that I see the Forestry Commission becoming much more an enabling body, an exhorting body, if you like, spreading good practice and being much more involved in promoting new planting once it can divest itself of spending too much time managing what it has got.

Lord Lewis of Newnham: Can I ask a final question? You refer to the fact that you are at the moment selling off land to allow for the deficiencies in your budget. When you have sold off all the land, what are you going to do?

Mr Jim Paice MP: The problem is that the Forestry Commission operates in such a way that it either loses or marginally makes profit on its commercial, pure forestry activities, give or take £1 million. When you add in all the other things that it is currently doing–leisure and other things, for example–it ends up with a significant deficit. It has been selling land partially to fund that deficit; some of it has been funded by taxpayers, some from sales. That is not a sustainable approach. We think, and this is one of our objectives in disposal, that there are ways of improving commercial returns and generating more returns from leisure and other, currently unprofitable, activities.

Watch here

On Friday the 10th December a packed Miners Welfare in Ciderford heard passionate speeches condemning the coalition Government's forest privatisation bill from Baroness Jan Royall, labour leader in the House of Lords, Rich Daniels, Chair of HOOF and many members of the audience.

Baroness Royall, Labour leader of the House of Lords, speaking against the privatisation bill to a packed Miners Welfare, Cinderford, on Friday 10th Dec.

Mark Harper, our MP, who is trying to push through the bill, was conspicuous by his absence, although invited to put his side of things some weeks ago. He pleaded a prior engagement, but he won no friends by absenting himself from this important meeting about the future of our Forest.

Time and again the speakers made the point that the Government's plans to allow local people and organisations to buy and run the Forest themselves was both impractical and an affront - we own the Forest already!

Baroness Jan Royall, who has lived in the Forest nearly all her life, said that the Forestry Commission in the Forest of Dean is based locally in Coleford and is always responsive to the wishes of local people. And while not always agreeing with everything it does, it has served our community very well in recent times, creating and maintaining access for all.

She also made the point that at the moment it costs the British public only 30p per person per year to run our forests and that it was hard to see how better value for money could be obtained in any other way.

In answer to a question about why HOOF were pressing for an exception to be made of the Forest of Dean rather than trying to overturn the bill in its entirety, Baroness Royall said that the Forest of Dean was different to other forests in that, for historical reasons, it had very few actual rights of way but instead had privileges. This made it much more vulnerable to having the footpaths and bridal paths that we all enjoy now, closed down.

LINKS TO VIDEO OF THE EVENING - COURTESY OF MICHAEL THOMAS

Parts 1-2 The Forest of Dean sell off

http://bristolindymedia.blip.tv/file/4508789/        Part 1
http://bristolindymedia.blip.tv/file/4509120/        Part 2

Parts 3-5 The Cinderford library sell off
http://bristolindymedia.blip.tv/file/4507659/          Part 3
http://bristolindymedia.blip.tv/file/4507858/          Part 4
http://bristolindymedia.blip.tv/file/4508370/          Part 5

A link to a radio broadcast on The Forest of Dean's own Triangle FM radio station

http://www.facebook.com/l/26c35b5tzgepvXw4svJ8q_t8tTQ;TriangleFM.co.uk

A link to a podcast by Jason Griffiths of audio interviews with people at the Miners Hall meeting. Visit http://www.forestofdeanpodcast.com/ and click HOOF

I have been poring over this Act (Google it and you should find it), and also looking at http://saveourforests.co.uk to look at its loopholes and limitations...

In summary: while we MAY be able to walk within the woods (or MAY NOT, see points 4 and 5):

1. we may be obliged to keep dogs on short leads of no more than two metres in length

2. we may find paths blocked and any visitor amenities, such as toilets, car parks, picnic sites and disabled/wheelchair access, no longer maintained - the landowner is under no obligation to keep our currently permissive routes, and unless we are on the Gloucestershire or Wysis Ways which traverse the Forest, the vast majority of other paths and tracks are not public rights of way

3. we will not necessarily be allowed to cycle or ride horses in the woods, let alone drive down Forestry tracks or get to picnicking/walking spots

4. any land can be closed to the public for 28 days of the year

5. we can be prevented from walking near any buildings, any new planting/felling areas, or areas where quarrying or mining activities taking place. Re planting, we have just heard that on public Forestry land recently sold in the Mendips, Somerset, that the public have been told they can't enter for another 30 or 40 years until the new crop matures.

One response to anyone who says 'wait for the White Paper'... where's the green paper from which consultation traditionally helps to form the white paper?

HOOF has wons the backing of Forest of Dean District Council.

The Council is to send a delegation to Parliament to put pressure on the Prime Minister, MPs and Lords against any sell-off.

The council has clarified that public ownership means a public body under the control of a democratically elected government.

Andrew Gardiner's motion was also passed.

The full motion that was passed:

Councillor Andrew Gardiner moved the following amended Motion.

To avoid attempts which could lead to Privatisation of the Royal Forest of Dean - this Council should do everything in its power to consolidate and enhance the exemptions from sale pertaining to the Statutory Forest of Dean and the protected contiguous woodlands (of Highmeadow, Clearwell and Hope ).

Furthermore because an enabling bill would empower ministers to act unilaterally and remove effective parliamentary scrutiny, this Council should seek enhanced protective designations in accordance with the protection afforded by Section 39(2A) of the Forestry Act 1967.

Therefore this Council to ;

1) write to Mark Harper M.P, Prime Minister David Cameron M.P, and electronically copy to the Secretary of State, Baroness Royall of Blaisdon , All Members of Parliament , House of Lords and Local Authorities – requesting their urgent action to exempt the Royal Forest of Dean from Clause 17 of the Public Bodies Bill.

2) for a deputation of Member’s representatives from All Groups and an Officer/s and co-opted expert/s to visit and meet with those engaged in the Public Bodies Bill passing through the Lords and Commons.

3) For the Solicitor of the Council to coordinate matters included in bullet point 2.

Leader of the council's Labour group Bruce Hogan's motion, with the last paragraph an added amendment by leader of the council's Independent group Norman Stephens' amendment (agreed to by Coun Hogan):

This council believes that the publicly owned woodlands currently managed by the Forestry Commission are a precious national asset.

This council aligns itself with the local campaign to prevent the sale or transfer of ownership of the Forest of Dean, (Hands Off Our Forest), and invites our Member of Parliament to a meeting with all elected members so that there can be a full and frank exchange of views.

Furthermore, this council makes clear in its stated opposition to any public owned Forestry land in the Forest of Dean being sold off that privatisation means the transfer of ownership of Forestry land to any body or organisation other than a local body under the control of a democratically elected government in the United Kingdom.

Dear Councillor Amos

The Public Bodies Bill - The Forest of Dean

I attended the Council meeting last Thursday and was alarmed by the misinformation that pervaded the chamber and the lack of appreciation of the issues relating to this matter, a matter of immense importance to the people of the Forest of Dean.  I trust therefore that you will not object to me addressing the matter by way of an open letter, it is too important to deal with in any other way.

At the meeting a member observed: “We are discussing legal points which we haven’t really grasped”.  Another suggested an adjournment to clarify the legal position.  Does this not suggest that the Council should have had an item placed on the agenda to discuss the issue with the benefit of an officers’ report explaining the law and the intricacies involved?  Was it not seen to be of sufficient significance to warrant that?

In the absence of a report the quality of the debate and, as I will show later in this letter, the resolution cobbled together at the last moment were poorer than then this issue and the people of the Forest of Dean deserve.

It was said at the meeting that no proposal had as yet been received from the Government.  But, as you will know, the Public Bodies Bill, was introduced in the House of Lords over a month ago and on any reading of it it will have a profound effect on the Forest if it passes unamended into statute.  To your credit you had familiarised yourself with the Bill and were in a position to debate the Government's proposals. You referred to the “rights” and “freedoms” mentioned in the Bill and, I believe, did so to persuade the meeting that the "rights" to the Forest we enjoy are not threatened by the Bill.  In this you reflected Defra’s promise that “Full measures will remain in place to preserve the public benefits of woods and forests under any new ownership arrangements.  … public rights of way and access will be unaffected … “

You referred to either Clause 8 or sub-clause (8), I am uncertain which.  But, if I understood you correctly, you said words to the effect that the Secretary of State’s power to make an order under the Bill was qualified, that he could do so only if he considers that the order “does not prevent any person from continuing to exercise any right or freedom which that person might reasonably expect to continue to exercise”. 

Since the meeting I have looked again at the Bill.  Clause 8 contains the qualification but that clause is concerned with the abolition and merging of offices and bodies, the modifying of constitutional and funding arrangements, the transfer of functions and delegation and was not relevant to the motion before the Council.

Clause 13 also has the qualification but it is concerned exclusively with the powers of Welsh ministers.

I conclude that you must have been referring to Clause 18, the only remaining clause containing the qualification, at sub-clause (8).  Clause 18 falls within that part of the Bill relating to forestry and deals with the powers of the Secretary of State to modify the constitutional arrangements and functions of the Forestry Commissioners, and to the transfer of their functions to another person. 

Clause 18 is of concern but it was not that to which the motion referred. Councillor Winship addressed her motion specifically to the sale of forestry land and it is to Clause 17 that we must refer.  Sub-clause (1) of Clause 17 states:

“This section applies to the functions of the Secretary of State under the following provisions of the Forestry Act 1967 -

(a)  Section 39(2) (disposal).“

The exercise of the Clause 17 functions are not qualified in the way you suggested, it makes no reference to rights and freedoms.  The provision you cited is therefore entirely misleading.

Even if the qualification applied to disposals it would not help the Forest. Rights and freedoms are capable of enforcement at law but our use and enjoyment of the Forest arises from historic privileges, not rights and freedoms. 

You will know from the Hansard reports of the 1981 debates I copied to you on the 4th December that “The Forest of Dean is wholly different (from other woodlands). It is an historic Crown forest in which an entire community has developed, using and enjoying the land in many ways which are not protected by legal rights. ... It is those privileges which can be wholly lost if this land is sold to private persons.”  The words of Lord Bledisloe QC who (I remind you in view of the nature of Thursday’s debate) clearly loved the Forest. His family has lived on the very edge of the Forest for more than 250 years and his father and grandfather and, he believed, more remote ancestors had all been verderers of the Forest.

As Lord Kilmarnock said in the 1981 debates “The Dean is in fact the only state forest where the local people have no rights whatsoever”.

And to quote Lord McNeil: “...the people who live in the Forest of Dean are uniquely disadvantaged and therefore uniquely endangered by the (1981) Bill as it stands (i.e. before the amendment exempting the Forest from the power of disposal), because for various historical reasons they have no legal rights of common or of access. Instead they have customary privileges, which are fully recognised by the Forestry Commission, and it is difficult to see how these de facto privileges could possibly be safeguarded if any part of the Forest of Dean were to pass into private hands.”

Thursday's debate demonstrated a failure on the part of some to appreciate the distinction between rights and privileges and that failure jeopardises all that was achieved in 1981: the exemption of the Forest from the power of disposal and the preservation of its customs and traditions.  Does it not occur to members that if those customs and privileges are lost, if the character of the Forest changes (as it inevitably must if it is sold off) tourism in the area will plummet with dire consequences for the local economy and employment?

There are other matters raised at the meeting with which I take issue.

It was said that there have been wholesale sales of Forest land and that excluding the Forest from the power of disposal would not achieve anything as the Forestry Commission has been selling off land and will continue to do so.  Do Councillors really believe this?  To throw this into the debate without identifying the land in question and its status is entirely unhelpful and should not have gone unchallenged.  

As you know land within the Forest may be sold “if it is not needed, or ought not to be used, for the purpose of afforestation or any purpose connected with forestry”.  So woodlands used for afforestation are protected; other Forestry Commission land may be sold.  If members know of the disposal of protected woodlands why has the Council not acted to protect the Forest?

Similarly, for reference to be made to “brownfield sites” as though that status has any bearing on what may or may not be sold under the Forestry Act is entirely misleading and demonstrates a poor understanding of the issues involved.

Thursday night's resolution

I have read the resolution passed at Thursday's meeting and wonder what interpretation the Secretary of State will put on it, it is sufficiently vague to be capable of more than one meaning.  Instead of "This council is opposed to any selling off of forest land that would compromise the protection of  our most valuable and bio diverse forest and lead to greater commercial exploitation and possibly reduced access" could your amendment not simply have said "This Council is opposed to the disposal of any land within the Forest of Dean which is needed or is used for the purpose of afforestation or any purpose connected with forestry"?  (I have borrowed the words of the Forestry Act 1967 as amended by the 1981 Act).

What is meant by "possibly" reduced access?  Does the Council doubt that access will be curtailed in the event of privatisation?  The 1981 Hansard Reports indicate unequivocally that it will be.

The first and last parts of the resolution are mutually contradictory: the first allows sales (if the forest is not compromised in the way suggested), the last seeks to prevent all privatisation. 

When does the Council anticipate consultation will take place?  By not specifying this the Council invites delay.  I believe Councillor Winship's motion sought consultation before the Bill is introduced into the House of Commons.  Why was this unacceptable to the Council?

The Council will defend our historic rights, traditions and privileges.  To what historic rights does the resolution refer?  

What "possible action" to prevent privatisation is envisaged?  Will the Council seek an injunction if the privatisation of any publicly owned forestry land in the Forest of Dean is proposed?  Should regard not be had to what the law allows?  There surely should be no objection to the privatisation of publicly owned forestry land in accordance with the Forestry Act 1967 as amended by the 1981 Act, i.e. land within the Forest which "is not needed, or ought not to be used, for the purpose of afforestation or any purpose connected with forestry".  The legislation permits the Forestry Commission to sell it.  So for the Council to resolve to take every possible action to prevent the privatisation of land which the statute says may be sold reflects a misunderstanding of the position and of the Council's powers.

The adjourned meeting next Wednesday affords the Council an opportunity to reconsider its position and ensure a coherent resolution.  Is not the most straight forward way of preserving the Forest to ask Parliament to exempt the Forest (and the contiguous woodlands like Highmeadow, Clearwell and Hope) from the effects of the Bill in the same way that the Forest was recognised as unique and treated as a special case in 1981 and exempted from the power of disposal in Section 2 of the Forestry Act 1967 as amended?

It was said on all sides of the chamber on Thursday evening that members love the Forest, that they want to keep it as it is.  If they are sincere in that they need to be reminded of what Lord McNeil said when he introduced his amendment to the Forestry Bill in 1981: “I want to emphasise that there is no party politics at all in this amendment. The friend who first alerted me to the danger is a Liberal; the chairman of the district council who came to London last Wednesday to plead with the Ministers to accept the amendment is a Labour councillor; and we have the wholehearted support of the Member of Parliament concerned for West Gloucestershire who is, of course, a Conservative. I am hopeful, too, that support may come from all points of the compass in this Chamber. So let us forget party politics—as we often do, I think, when we are at our best—and discuss this very important matter entirely on its merits.”

On behalf of all those who live in and who visit the Forest and those who strove so successfully to protect the Forest in 1981 and 1994, and the generations to come, may I plead with the Council to be at its best, to forget party politics and discuss this matter next Wednesday entirely on its merits (members having taken the trouble to make themselves fully conversant with the issues involved beforehand).

Yours sincerely

Alan Robertson

RESIDENTS in Coalway have been canvassed by their MP on `an opportunity to own our Forest'.
Mark Harper approached villagers and delivered pamphlets which stated: "Instead of bureaucrats based in London telling us how to run the Forest, the Government's plans open the door for local people to take charge of our Forest and decide how it's managed... I think the opportunity to own and control our Forest locally is not one we should give up lightly and I'd like your opinion on this'.

Resident Siamak Alimi told the MP he opposed any sell-off: "Mark and his entourage looked rattled by the strength of feeling from local people. He called our reaction `hysterical' and invited me to wait for the White Paper before jumping to conclusions."

Felicity Greenman, also from Coalway, said: "I spent 10 minutes telling him how vehemently I oppose any sell-off, and how on earth can the community run it?"

The Dean's Forestry chief, deputy surveyor Kevin Stannard, confirmed that - although he follows Government guidelines, "within that framework, the local interpretation and implementation of that guidance is very much down to me and my team". This includes "what works for the people, wildlife and trees that make up the Dean".

After every council meeting, the minutes are published on the Forest of Dean Council web site www.fdean.gov.uk

It can take up to a week after the meeting before they appear.

The minutes contain full information on how each councillor voted in each motion debated.

Alternatively you can phone the Democratic Services department of the council and ask how individual councillors voted. 01594 810 000

You can find out who your councillors are by using this link .www.writetothem.com