AS one who played a very minor role in 1981 in helping

Lord McNair and Leslie Packer, the then Chief Executive of

the Forest of Dean District Council to secure the

exemption of the Forest of Dean from the general power

of disposal of the 1967 Forestry Act I have read the

articles and correspondence on this matter with interest.

In particular I have noted Defra's letter to MPs and Mark

Harper MP's statement from which it appears that we "can

be confident that our rights of access and local traditions

are not under any threat."

In 1981, in the debate on the Forestry Bill, Mr

Harper's Conservative predecessor Paul Marland had this

to say in the House of Commons:

"I regard the possible sale of the Royal Forest of

Dean and other Crown forests to faceless investors as a

national disaster. The Royal Forest of Dean is steeped in

ancient history and tradition. Today's Forester is of the

same independent mind and rugged character as were his

forefathers.?It is our duty to preserve his ancient rights

and traditions.

"The ancient traditions exist in the Royal Forest of

Dean. It is a national asset and in some ways a national

monument. Hundreds of thousands of people go there

every year either for the day or for their holidays. They go

there to examine the national heritage of the Royal Forest

of Dean. They go walking, riding, swimming, picnicking

and caravanning. They walk unrestricted through the

trees.

"...However, such privileges have no legal status.?If

the Forest were sold to faceless investors those rights

could be snuffed out and people would be denied rights

of access.

"For centuries Forest sheep have grazed there... It is

easy to understand why the graziers believe it to be their

right to graze their sheep in the Forest of Dean. This

belief in their ancient rights and customs is reinforced by

the fact that, although in 1808, under the Dean and New

Forest Act, the Foresters were discharged from all rights

of common and from all manners of rights, claims and

privileges to the Forest of?Dean, they continued to enjoy

those rights and privileges at the discretion of the

Forestry Commission.

"Then...under the provisions of the Commons

Registration Act, local inhabitants were prevented from

registering their interest and their rights of way in this

common. It seems, therefore, that the Crown took away

the statutory right of common and rights of way in 1808,

and that local people have not been allowed to register

their common rights since then.

"If the Forest of Dean is sold there will be no Forest

trails, no picnic sites and no sheep, because they do not

enjoy legal status. In their place will be high fences and

"keep out" notices, if the new owner of the Forest is so

inclined."

In the Commons Mrs Thatcher's government

declined to support Mr Marland's attempt to protect the

Forest and it was left to Lord McNair to persuade the

House of Lords to adopt the necessary amendment. In

accepting and moving the amendment the Earl of

Mansfield, speaking on behalf of the government, said:

"The Government recog­nise that the Forest of Dean

is unique and that its land should not be sold... The

amendment will therefore maintain the status quo in the

Forest as regards disposals."

At Lord McNair's urging he went further and stated,

for the record, that because of their Crown status and

long and intimate association with the Forest of Dean

certain areas not within the statutory forest would be

treated in all respects as though they were part of the

Dean Forest. These include Highmeadow Woods, Clearwell

Woods and Hope Woods.

In consequence, the 1967 Forestry Act, as amended

by the 1981 Forestry Act, exempts from the power of

disposal the Forest of Dean (and the associated areas

referred to by Lord Mansfield) other than land which "is

not needed, or ought not to be used, for the purpose of

afforestation or any purpose connected with forestry," i.e.

waste of the forest which has traditionally been available

for disposal.

The Lord's amendment was accepted by the

Government and moved in the Commons by the Minister

of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Jerry Wiggin) who

stated:

"The Government recognise that the Forest of Dean

is unique and that its land should not be sold except...

surplus cottages, small areas of the Waste in the forest

and the like (which) will be sold as in the past, but there

will be no power to sell significant areas of forest land."

In the debate on the amendment Mr Marland argued

that without the amendment "the Forest remained prey to

faceless investors, who, if they chose, could fence off the

land that they bought and deny access, thereby ending

the Foresters' ancient tradition of grazing and access to

the grounds, on the basis that they were not legally

recognised... The trails and Forest walks... are not legally

recognised, but are permitted and established due to the

understanding nature of the Forestry Commission.

Because of the lack of legally recognised rights of

common, of access and of Forest trails and footpaths, it

was vital that the Forest be excluded from the Bill," and

that because of the lack of these rights "it was essential

that the Forest of Dean should be recognised as a special

case."

There is some irony in his concluding remarks:

"My constituents and I are secure in the knowledge

that after the passage of the Bill the Royal Forest of Dean

cannot be sold and fall prey to marauding investors or

future Governments' greed, which I suggest is far more

likely. For if we had an extreme Left-wing Government ...

there would be nothing to prevent them from selling off

the Forest if the Bill were in its unamended form. The

Forest has been protected from future Governments'

greed."

What, in the light of this, are we to make of Defra's

assurances? How will the Forest of Dean's acknowledged

uniqueness and its inhabitants' privileges (rather than

rights) be preserved and protected?

Is our MP being complacent or naive in referring in

his statement to the preservation of public benefits of

woods and forests and stating that public rights of way

and access will be unaffected? and in welcoming "the fact

that all the things the public values about the Forest of

Dean will be protected." Or will he, like his predecessor,

come to appreciate that, because of the uniqueness of the

Forest of Dean, the lack of rights over Crown Land and

the absence of public rights of way and access, the Forest

should be recognised as a special case? And will he then

fight on our behalf to retain the status quo under the

1967 Act, as amended in 1891, and, in the House of

Commons, will he speak out against any proposal to

amend the Act to remove the protection it affords the

Forest of Dean?

– Alan Robertson, High Green, St Briavels.