I spoke with two of the most significant woodland-related conservation NGOs today (the Woodland Trust and Small Woods Association). Both have clear lines on the proposed sale of England’s public forest estate. The Woodland Trust supports the restoration of ancient woodland and the Small Woods promotes community ownership of local woodlands. Both are admirable approaches.
By not categorically coming out against the Government’s proposals, and by offering solutions to the aftermath, they can be used as pawns by the Government to add credibility to case for disposal. Just that happened yesterday when David Cameron said the Woodland Trust would be able to manage woodlands better than the Forestry Commission. In almost all cases this is obviously false, and the Woodland Trust will agree that they are not in the position to manage those woods.
If there is a fear that a public campaign to stop the proposals will be perceived as shallow and limited to access and emotive issues, the Government may be able to say that the consultation responses are media-driven. We need the conservation NGOs to add some specialist weight to the debate. The more I talk to people the more I feel the proposals raise significant risks for very very little likely gain. The Government are playing divide and rule with the NGOs, and we should be wary of this.
