To all 6,076 of you, thank you!

That’s how many of our supporters took the trouble in just 14 days to respond to our quick poll about the new public forest estate management organisation, proposed details of which were announced by the Forestry Commission in August.

We submitted our full response to the fifteen questions in the Commission’s request for feedback on Monday which included details of your poll results.

A wordle of the comments made by the 6076 supporters who took part in our PFE poll.

A wordle of the comments made by the 6076 supporters who took part in our PFE poll.

Within four hours the Commission has been in touch to say that it “wished to record its appreciation for all the effort that has clearly gone into this from both your members and staff….there are many carefully argued and cogent points made and we will of course be considering them closely as we take the work forward and prepare advice to Ministers.”

Your fantastic response strengthens our feedback to Government showing that we speak for thousands of forest enthusiasts.

We now await the next steps and will keep you posted.

Hilary Allison, Woodland Trust Policy Director


About Oliver Newham

Senior Campaigner Ancient Woodland
This entry was posted in Campaigning, Climate Change, Conservation, Consultation, Defra, England, Government Affairs and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to To all 6,076 of you, thank you!

  1. Isabel says:

    I also agree that cafes etc. do not belong in an ancient woodland site. That is for high streets. Cafes would bring rubbish and broken bottles and a forest’s wildlife just do not need them. Surely the activity of walking through a woodland, seeing the assorted trees, plants and birds is recreation enough.

    Sometimes, I think the authorities try too hard to civilise everything. Lop those branches off those trees. Shave that grassy verge with a lawnmower. I wonder if they ever think of how many creatures they are depriving of a home or a living just because they cannot let a meadow be wild and just HAVE to cut that grass into shape, or what beauty they destroy by amputating a trees limbs..

  2. Fabulous news this is a brilliant result well done .Please send his to Hastings Council they need to know how much people think of their woodlands like Speckled Wood and not consider them as building sites instead of a valued resource that is used by the community and the animals and rare wild species that live there to find out more,_Hastings

  3. Roderick Leslie says:

    It is fantastic that so many WT supporters are hanging in with a Government process which looks increasingly like an attempt to shake off public involvement through the sheer length of time it is taking. It is a very clear warning that the protest over the sales proposals was not the flash in the pan some apologists continue to try and claim. For me, the key is in the Governance – and in particular the all-powerful Board which the Government proposes should have a Chairman appointed by the Minister and members through the public appointments process, which effectively means by Defra civil servants – which is diametrically opposed to what the Panel proposed and what WT members want to see. Political interference is the biggest threat to our forests – in the last 20 years it is Ministers – John Major in 92/93 and Jim Paice in 2010 who have tried to get rid of our public forests and it is Ministers ideologically opposed to public forests who must be the greatest threat in the future. We must continue to fight for a Board that is appointed in a way that ensures that no political party nor any one of the many interests involved in our forests can dominate the future, and a Board that is first and foremost for the forests.

  4. I didn’t tick ‘Go ape’ or ‘leisure’ and ‘cafe facilities’ because i was worried about extra hard space being created which would impact on green spaces. Also I didn’t tick forest industries on the Board because I thought it was covered higher up the list.

    • Beverley Phillips says:

      I agree. ‘Go Ape’, cafes and other leisure type activities seem completely inappropriate for an ancient woodland site! How can nature function will that sort of stuff going on? Cars should not be allowed in or near it either. As for who should ‘run’ the woodland – it must be groups who care about the woodland for itself. Do we actually need funding? Can’t the woodland be left to grow, regenerate, thrive etc. Why does it need human interference? (Except maybe to ‘police’ it!)

Sorry, comments are closed as we have moved to a new site:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s