Forest sell-off plans met with huge opposition
Communities and environment groups have expressed dismay over government plans to sell 258,000ha of English forests
Government plans to sell 258,000 hectares (637,000 acres) of English forests for up to 250m today met with huge opposition from communities and environment groups.
In the biggest change of English land ownership in 80 years, outlined today by the environment secretary, Caroline Spelman, the public will be asked to raise tens of millions of pounds to buy and manage local forests or see them go to commercial organisations on 150-year leases.
Feelings are running high, with more than a quarter of a million people having signed a petition to stop the government sale, and a YouGov poll showing that 84% of people are broadly opposed to the plans.
Under government plans, new or existing charities will be given 80,000ha of England's premier "heritage" woodlands, such as the Forest of Dean and the New Forest, to run. A further 13-26,000ha of other wooded land presently managed by the Forestry commission will be offered to communities and charities to buy at market rates. If these are not picked up, they will be offered, along with all England's large-scale commercial forests, to businesses on the open market. The sale of the very long leases is expected to raise around 150-250m over 10 years.
Launching its consultation today, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs admitted it did not know whether local communities and charities would try to buy or would be able to raise the money to buy the la! nd at ma rket rates. Officials said they had not had time to examine each site but expected about 8% of woodland to be acquired by "big society" groups. However, internal Forestry Commission documents seen by the Guardian suggest only 1% of woodland will be acquired by communities and 2% by charities, leaving the vast majority to be offered to commercial businesses.
David Cameron and Spelman sought to reassure the public that existing access to woodland and the ecological quality of English woodland would be maintained or improved in private hands. The prime minister's spokesman said: "We are not going to sell off our heritage forests to the highest bidder, we are not going to remove public access to forests there will be strict rules in place to prevent that happening. There is a consultation. We are going to have that consultation and listen to people's views and then come to some conclusions. There is a range of potential buyers for forests, from the private sector to community groups."
Spelman said: "We want to move from a 'big government' approach to a 'big society' one, so that we can give different groups individuals, businesses and civil society organisations the opportunity to be involved in managing the natural environment. And we will make sure that public access is maintained and biodiversity protected. Leasing rather than selling will allow the lease conditions to ensure that the public benefits of these woodlands are preserved while allowing the operators to maximise their commercial potential."
Although fears about continued access to heritage forests were allayed by the government's plans to guarantee existing access, they remained high for larger commercially run forests, as well as large areas of heath and bog that the commission also owns. "We remain unconvinced that the correct safeguards and support mechanisms have been built into the proposals for commercially valuable forests and woodlands that include lowland heathland and native woodland," said the RSPB in a statement! .
"We want long-term guarantees that any change in woodland ownership will not undermine the quality of the landscape, the rich diversity of wildlife or people's ability to get out there and enjoy our forests. The current undertakings do not go far enough, and nor are they sufficiently robust," said Shaun Spiers, chief executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England. "'Heritage forests' will be protected, but the consultation document says nothing about the many other important forests in England that need protection what will the future hold for them?"
Earlier indications that government might be able to raise 500m from sales and cut the existing 10m annual subsidy to the Forestry Commission in England were dashed, partly because it proved politically impossible to sell off large sites such as the Forest of Dean and the New Forest. Less money will also be raised because the government now intends to sell leases with stringent access conditions, rather than the freehold.
Community groups said they feared the disposal would lead to people being charged to go into forests. "This new threat is the most serious attack on the New Forest for 160 years. Any charity that takes on owning and managing the New Forest will be required to find its own funding after initial government help to offset the 2.9m annual deficit. This could mean charging the public for access to the New Forest, and will almost certainly involve selling off parts of the estate which currently provide the cornerstone of commoning," said the New Forest Association chairman, William Ziegler.
Critics also warned that the financial savings of selling the forests could be cancelled out by an increase in private companies taking public forestry subsidies. "The sell-off makes no economic sense," said Caroline Lucas, Green MP. "Who will want to buy this land unless they can develop it into a profit-making enterprise? The plans are unlikely to make any money, an! d may ev en cost the taxpayer extra, as those who take our forests apply for government grants that may match or even exceed the value of the sale."
Lord Clark of Windermere, a co-founder of the Save Lakeland's Forests group, which is holding a rally at Grizedale forest on Sunday, said: "People are passionate about our public forests. This response should not come as a surprise to ministers. Selling off large areas of our forests will only make a very small contribution to paying off the national debt, but once they are handed over to the private sector they will be gone for good. At present these forests unlike most of those in private ownership provide easy access and are managed by the Forestry Commission on our behalf in a way that maximises the environmental benefits."
Comments