On a personal note, having a strange man rubbing your back always feels a bit odd but I could hardly walk yesterday afternoon and now, although I am not, in the words of Van Morrison, 'Laughing and a running hey, hey Skipping and a jumping', I am able to blog and respond to comments!
Yesterday the Guardian posted our comment piece on the real battle for our forests. It is based on an earlier blog from here so won't surprise readers of this blog but it brings our thoughts, or some of them, to a wider audience. And there were, yesterday when I looked, about 120 comments on it - which are also worth looking at.
What is this battle about? Is it about stopping the Forest of Dean being chopped down? - no, as it never would have been. Is it about saving our ancient forests? - partly. Is it about saving the Forestry Commission? - it is for some people. Is it about maintaining public access to, and biodiversity in, existing forests? - yes partly. Is it about giving the Government a bloody nose? - yes, for some people. Is it about maintaining and enhancing wildlife on state-managed land? - yes, partly. Is it about the Public Bodies Bill? - partly, but that is a much bigger issue which transcends forest. Is it about NGOs wanting to get their hands on lots of land? - maybe, but not as far as the RSPB is concerned. Is it about Big Society and how it might or might not work? - yes, it's a case study. Is it about us, the nation, owning land? - yes, partly. Is it about NNRs as well as forests, and about heathlands as well as woods? - yes, I think it is.
It's also about how public spending cuts affect nature - which we did make quite an issue in the run-up to the CSR in October. Things might have been even worse were it not for those hundreds of thousands of voices mobilised by the RSPB - your voices in Letter to the Future.
It's about lots of things. And some of them are painted in shades of grey.
PS Note added later. I see the Daily Telegraph has a piece on our and the Wildlife Trusts' worries about heathlands too.
Hi Folks
It is not the Government's responsibility to operationally manage Woodland
Get a grip!
So what's the solution?
Mark
I've been enjoying your comments which are insightful and measured unlike some others' out there. I would love to hear and read more about sustainable forest mangement - you know the real 'sustainable' - when a resource is managed for more than one purpose and for the long term. The real conundrum for me is the possible outcomes of any sale (sorry lease) of land to the private sector when we know that there are currently 625,000 hectares of woodlands in England without a management plan at present.
As the RSPB agreed, along with the other major environmental NGOs under the Wildife Link umbrella group, we need to bring more woodlands into good condition.
We need to think carefully how any sale could influence the sorry state of some of English woodlands, and ensure that things improve and certainly don't get worse. Beyond the possible changes that may come from direct changes in ownership (ie the decisions a new owner may make on the ground), there are dangers from strategic impacts too, should the FC become weakened by this in the long term (and consequently Forest Research too).
Just when we are faced with opportunities in forestry from carbon management, yet threats from increasting pests / diseases and a changing climate, is when we most need a robust state sector, strong political interest as a result, and excellence in forestry research.
Gabriel
gabrielhemery.com/.../public-sell-off