It's quite interesting, isn't it, that the Government is getting into a bit of a tight spot over forestry sell-offs and lease-offs. People aren't uniformly enthusiastic about small government when it comes to slimming down the Forestry Commission and handing things over to Big Society. And to be fair, it's difficult to find much of Big Society that seems terribly keen on it either.
I was at an excellent conference on Saturday, organised by the Sussex Ornithological Society, where, after my talk, I was asked a question about forest sell-offs. The line that I gave was, of course, the same as in this blog. And it seemed to be pretty much what the audience thought too - dispose of some commercial forests, with safeguards, by all means, but protect the biodiversity-rich heritage sites.
And the same issues will be coming along with NNRs soon too.
As publicised over the Christmas break, a group of NGOs including the RSPB have agreed some principles about whether we would be prepared to take on heritage sites from NE and FC.
A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.
Hi Mark, I thought the inital response to the consultation document from the Woodland Trust published on their web site was well considered and worth a read if you haven't already. Concern for proper protection of ancient woodlands is a prime concern of theirs as well as questioning the feasiblity of the whole process..
redkite