THE information I have received is now as complete as it

will ever be on the thorny subject of how to be a 'Female

Free Miner' in the Forest of Dean; so as requested by

those interested parties who asked me to reveal all on

how it came about, here it is in chronological order and

intriguing it is.

On August 6 2008, J Harvey, Deputy Gaveller wrote

to Ms Mormon acknowledging the receipt of her

application to become a free miner received on June 9

2008, reminding her that only male persons could be

legally registered, but subsequent Acts may modify this

require­ment. Prior to further consideration he requested

her to give greater detail about the work she did in the

mine.

On January 8 2009, Mr Harvey wrote to the applicant

thanking her for the additional information, but informed

her that: "the work undertaken by you would appear to be

that necessary for the operation and maintenance of a

tourist mine. Further, it would appear that as no statutory

production returns relating to the production of iron ore

have been submitted to this office for over ten years, it is

assumed therefore that such production was, and is,

minimal.

"However, the principal obstacle to your application

is that of gender. As you are aware, only male persons are

permitted to be registered and extensive research

indicates that there are no grounds for allowing variations

to this registration requirement. Regrettably therefore,

your application to be registered is refused."

On August 25, 2009, Mark Harper MP wrote to John

Harvey informing him that he raised the issue of allowing

women to become free miners during the committee stage

of the Equality Bill. He had moved a new clause which

would have allowed this to happen.

"Due to some complexities of parliamentary

procedure to do with hybrid bills (those which affect some

members of a group in a different way from others) the

Minister did not feel able to support my new clause," he

wrote.

On November 26, 2009, the Solicitor General Vera

Baird QC wrote to Mark Harper saying that she had looked

at "some other way of giving one of your female

constituents the opportunity to be registered as a free

miner."

Under Section XV11 of the 1838 Act "Women cannot

so qualify".

" However, Section 1 of the Employment Act 1989

provides that an Act passed before the Sex Discrimination

Act 1975 (SDA) "shall be of no effect" in so far as it

imposes a requirement to do something which would be

unlawful by Part11 of the SDA. Part 11 makes it unlawful

for a qualifying body to discriminate against a woman by

refusing to grant her application for an authorisatin or

qualification which that body can confer. A qualifying

body within the meaning of section 13 of the Act is "an

authority or body which can confer an authorization or

qualification which is needed for, or facilitates,

engagement in a particular profession or trade".

Subsection(3) then makes it clear that "authorisation or

qualification" includes registration.

"My officials have concluded: (a) a deputy gaveller is

an "authority" for this purpose, and (b) registration as a

Free Miner can be considered to be necessary for or to

facilitate engagement in a "profession or trade".

"Consequently, their view is that the 1938 Act

requires the deputy gaveller to act in a way which is

contrary to section 13 of the SDA in that he must refuse to

register a woman as a miner. Thus by virtue of section 1

of the Employment Act 1989 this requirement is of no

effect under the SDA."

(Note that this says 'miner' and not 'Free miner'. The

officials appear to believe that anyone who works in

mines in the Forest has to be registered as a free miner,

which is not correct. Also they don't appear to have

considered section 21. (21) of the SDA 1975. "No females

shall be employed in a job the duties of which ordinarily

require the employee to spend a significant proportion of

his time below ground at a mine that is being worked".)

"I should emphasise that I cannot advise how your

constituent should proceed, but I do not regard this letter

as private or confidential and I hope she will find it

helpful."

On January 25 2010, Mark Harper MP wrote to Ms

Mormon: "The SG has told me that her officials in the GEO

have concluded that the DF (Mines) Act 1838 requires the

Deputy Gaveller to act in a way which is contrary to

section 13 of the SDA 1975 in that he must refuse to

register a woman as a miner. By virtue of section of the

Employment Act 1989 this requirement has no effect

under the SDA... I hope that he will accept the advice of

officials in the GEO and will be able to register you as a

free miner."

On February 5, 2010, Mark Harper wrote to John

Harvey about the SGs advice and "That appears now not

be a lawful reason to refuse her (Ms Mormon)

registration."

On February 15, 2010, Ms Mormon re-applied for

registration, this time stating that her trade or business

was ochre mining and processing in the Old Ham Iron

Mine.

On May 2, 2010, John Harvey wrote to the applicant:

"Mark has also contacted me and provided me with similar

documents together with an opinion from the SG

regarding the SDA 1975 and in particular Section 13 of

that Act. The section states that "it is unlawful for an

authority or body which can confer an authorization or

qualification which is needed for, or facilitates,

engagement in a particular profession or trade to

discriminate against a woman."

The significance of this section would appear to

depend on the interpretation of the word "needed" and

implies a requirement to hold or obtain, in this case,

registration as a free miner, to undertake the work of a

miner in the Hundred of St Briavels.

As you are aware from your own experience, you do

not need to be registered as a free miner to work in, own

or manage any mine or gale within the Hundred of St

Briavels and therefore your application to be registered is

again refused."

So that was that was that then. Not So! A line was

crossed through the letter and it wasn't sent. Instead a

note at the top of the letter said "Deputy Surveyor and

Land Agent to refer to Eversheds Solicitors."

Who stopped the letter being sent, it didn't say. One

can only guess who and why.

May 28, 2010, Mark Harper wrote to John Harvey

with concerns that he and his constituent hadn't heard

from him.

On June 7, 2010 a letter was written to Helen

Thomas of Eversheds, Solicitors by RW Davies Area Land

Agent FC saying: "Historically all free miners have been

male, but we are now considering an application from a

lady, Elaine Mormon, who works in a tourist mine at

Clearwell Caves. Despite the fact that she is not a miner in

the traditional sense, we (?) are satisfied that her

employment at the caves qualifies her under the terms of

the Acts.

"However, there is some uncertainty as to whether

the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 applies in this case.....As

you can work as a miner in the Forest of Dean without

being a free miner, it is being suggested that inclusion of

the word "needed" provides grounds for refusal. There is,

in confidence, opposition in the mining community to the

acceptance of a female free miner and to this candidate in

particular.

"As you can imagine, we do not want to appear in

court challenging an issue under the Sex Discrimination

Act. We are mindful to agree the application but to

support our decision, I would appreciate you

interpretation of the relevant Acts."

On August 12, 2010, Kevin G Stannard Deputy

Surveyor of the Forest of Dean and John Harvey wrote to

Tim Rollinson, DG Forestry Commission in Edinburgh in

which they outlined the background of the application to

him and also the advice of Eversheds (which hasn't been

released. Too sensitive?) Also he stated that the Deputy

Gaveller is minded to reject the the application (for a

second time) on the grounds of gender, as he is required

to do under the Act ( no mention of 'needed'). That would

then ordinarily resolve itself through an appeal to the

courts and due legal process, which would inevitably lead

to the registration going ahead by order of the court. This

would no doubt lead to very significant adverse publicity

in local and national media and potentially involve the

Minister at some stage. We have therefore agreed a more

sensible route.

"In 1924 the 'Gavellership' (ie the responsibilities of

the Gaveller) were transferred to the Forestry

Commissioners, and no single person has thus held that

post since.

"We would like to refer this historic case to the

Forestry Commissioners, in their capacity as Gaveller, in

order to make the decision to accept the registration then

we can be seen to have recognised the importance of the

decision, the historical precedent, and acted after due

considerstion. Elaine can then be registered as being a

free miner by Order of the Gaveller (or by order of the

Forestry Commissioners).

"There is a strong likelihood that a second refusal to

register would be challenged in the courts, and we are

very likely to lose that case. However, there is a moderate

chance that the Freeminers' Association (or individual

members of) would challenge the registration through the

courts anyway – and in that case we would expect them to

lose that challenge. So there is a prospect of legal action

against the Forestry Commission whichever decision is

made.

As this matter has involved much discussion and

debate already, we are referring it to the Forestry

Commissioners at a late stage, and humbly request that

the Forestry Commissioners agree the registration (or not)

as a matter of urgency.

On August 31, 2010 Stephen Bennett, Head of

Corporate Services and Diversity, FC, Edinburgh, emailed

John Harvey and Kevin Stannard.

He told them: "I have been in touch with the Forestry

Commissioners explaining the situation and can now

confirm their unanimous decision, in their role as Gaveller

of the Forest of Dean, to accept the registration of Elaine

Mormon as a free miner under the Dean Forest (Mines)

Act of 1938."

On September 3 Heather Lilley, Public Affairs

Manager, FC, FOD, put out a media release on the news

including enthusing " The centuries' old tradition has

been brought bang up to date/into the 21st Century!" The

Forestry Commission congratulates her on this significant

historic event."

So there you have it. A revered Forest tradition has

been changed forever so it can be "bang up to date" and

21st Century!"

Wow, whatever next, selling off the Forest of Dean to

the highest bidder? So very 21st Century. Not a chance,

who could possibly even contemplate such an awful thing;

especially with our MP quoting that we "need to take steps

to ensure the future of the Forest's traditions" and who

wants to keep "local culture alive." We are in safe hands,

fellow Foresters.

Or are we?

– John Belcher, Joyford.