Forestry Commission Consultation Hub

The external consultation for the Lydford Forest Plan was open for six weeks in September/October 2023. Posters were put up at the entrances to the woods, directing people to an online survey. In addition, emails were sent specifically to organisations and individuals who we felt have an interest in how the forest is managed e.g. parish councils, local interest groups.

The majority of the 15 respondents to the survey describe themselves as forest users and neighbours, but there were also comments from Devon County Council and Butterfly Conservation.

Respondents scored functions of the forest plan in terms of importance to them / their organisation. Biodiversity, climate change, recreational access and forest protection were deemed to be the most significant, with all respondents scoring them as either ‘important’ or ‘very important’. 14 of the 15 respondents said that the forest plan addresses their needs and interests (or those of their organisation) ‘very well’, ‘well’ or ‘ok’, with plenty of positive feedback including:

“pretty balanced and gives a long term plan for the area”

Forestry England’s response: Thank you! A great deal of time has been spent balancing objectives for wildlife, people, climate and the economy to ensure Lydford forest is managed sustainably now and in the future.

“No disagreements with any aspect of the plan. Great to see that you have incorporated grazing into the plan, including assessments of the potential to implement grazing.”

Forestry England’s response: Grazing is something we will be considering in coming years as a tool to assist us in meeting our objectives, particularly those for open space management and heritage conservation. We look forward to working with partners on this in the future.

“I have noticed that since there are less pine copses and more leaf trees along the track, the forest has come alive l with bird song, which is most enjoyable and ensures that the world is still a good place to be. -  Long may it continue.”

Forestry England’s response: All types of woodland have wildlife value, but we are pleased with the direction of change at Lydford, and pleased to hear how important our sites are for visitors.

“It is particularly good to see the careful attention given to the many features of archaeological significance”

Forestry England’s response: Lydford Forest is an important site for archaeology, and we continue to work with Historic England to manage the heritage features within the woods to safeguard them for future generations.

Some people also expressed concerns that the plan was not thorough enough on certain topics. These include:

“It is disappointing to see the commentary about failing to achieve the objective of conserving heathland fragments at Burley Wood during the last Forest Plan period.  Whilst this might be the pragmatic approach, it would be a great shame for there to be no attempt to maintain some ongoing representation of this 'heathy' character within parts of the woodland setting at Burley Down, even if confined to appropriate ongoing management of some of the rides and small glades.”

Forestry England’s response: During forest operational planning, areas of heathland are recognised and avoided so that they may continue to establish at Burley Down. Management techniques to restore heathland remnants will also be considered as part of this planning process. Compensatory open space will be created along the southern end of Lydford forest, where it will play a greater role in recovering butterfly species and linking up to surrounding open space.

“The ancient hill fort that has been damaged by a forest road needs more respect.”

Forestry England’s response: We acknowledge that past management of the hillfort has not been as careful as it is today. During the forest planning process and when writing our scheduled monument plans, we work closely with Historic England to ensure that our operations are not detrimental to heritage features, and that they are kept in favourable condition. Features (both scheduled and unscheduled) are identified during operational site planning and avoided during harvesting works.

“We believe that Forestry England is funded by taxpayers and so the aftermath of managing woodlands should include restoration or protection of pathways for continued use by the public.”

We work hard to support public access by reinstating forest roads and public rights of way as quickly as possible after forestry operations. Sometimes, this might be delayed by poor weather, but will be done as soon as conditions allow. Forestry England receives very little government funding and generates more than 80% of its own income.

“After felling and removal of viable timber the remaining branches and off cuts as well as deeply gouged mud filled tacks prevent any access to woodlands. Sometimes the debris is roughly piled into huge mounds and left to rot down/provide a habitat for fauna(?) but this simply creates space for blackberry to make the area totally impenetrable to the public.”

Forestry England’s response: We acknowledge that the forest looks very different after harvesting than it did before, and it will continue to change as felled areas regenerate. Deadwood and decaying vegetation are critical parts of a woodland ecosystem that are often missing due to previous management prescriptions, and are beneficial for returning nutrients to the soil and providing niches for specialist animals and fungi. Brambles are also an important food source for many species including butterflies and birds.

Other comments relating to the placement of dog waste bins and benches, signage, bicycle access and car park maintenance have been passed on to the local forest management teams. These concerns were considered outside of the scope of the Forest Plan, which is intended to set out land management objectives to ensure forest resilience and sustainability into the future.

The external consultation for the Dymock Forest Plan was open for five weeks in June / July 2023. Posters were put up at the entrances to the woods, directing people to an online survey. In addition, emails were sent specifically to organisations and individuals who we felt have an interest in how the forest is managed eg parish councils, local interest groups.

The majority of the 35 respondents to the survey describe themselves as forest users and neighbours, but there were also comments from Natural England, Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust (GWT), a few volunteers and some of the supporters of DyFRA – Dymock Forest Rural Action.

97% of respondents said that the forest plan addresses their needs and interests (or those of their organisation) ‘very well’, ‘well’ or ‘ok’, with plenty of positive feedback:

“Wonderful to see the wood so well looked after,” and “it’s very heartening to know how thoughtfully this precious, beautiful ancient woodland is being managed”.

Forestry England’s response:

• • Thank you – it’s always good to know that people appreciate our hard work!

“Very thorough woodland management plan… many aspects considered with clear objectives” (comment from Natural England), and “the plan is clear, well-designed and gives all the key information required”.

Forestry England’s response:

• • Thanks again. A great deal of time has been spent trying to balance the functions of the woodlands, so that they deliver for people, nature and, where appropriate, economy, now and into the future.

Some respondents expressed concern about overnight parking, flytipping and motorbikes.

Forestry England’s response:

• We are aware of occasional issues of antisocial behaviour and are happy to put up temporary signs in the worst affected areas to try to discourage this. Please do get in touch to report issues so that we know where notices should be placed.

Some people asked questions about the weed in the lake, and made valid comments about the potential for watercourses to have a role in natural flood management.

Forestry England’s response:

• We removed invasive weed from the lake in 2018, which was quite a complex and potentially damaging operation, so we will keep a close eye on the situation, but won’t undertake this again unless absolutely necessary.
• Regarding our treatment of watercourses, we will gradually clear mature trees from the banks, to encourage regeneration of riparian species such as willow. We will leave woody debris in streams (where it is safe and appropriate to do so) to slow the flow and to encourage the development of wet woodland. This has already been done in the Orchid Reserve.

GWT and DyFRA highlighted the need for connectivity in the landscape, asking whether we could promote a land acquisition policy to join up fragments of woodland in the area.

Forestry England’s response:

• While we wholly recognise the importance of connectivity in the landscape, we are limited in what we can do to influence planting of trees or hedges or other wildlife corridors to connect pieces of land that we do not own or manage. However, we are happy to consider collaborations if we are approached with proposals for landscape-scale projects.

Other less common questions and comments have been answered individually where an email address was provided.

Consultation for the Surrey Hills Forest Plan was open for six weeks from late January to the beginning of March 2023. We emailed a group of consultees and put posters up at entrances to our Surrey Hills woods, directing people to this online survey.

There were 31 responses to the Surrey Hills Forest Plan survey. 26 respondents answered question 1 (do you agree that the plan achieves an appropriate balance of social, economic, and environmental objectives for the woodland?). Of these 26 respondents, 16 answered yes to question 1, while 15 answered no.

The majority of those who disagreed with question 1 feel that Forestry England need to consider the needs of mountain bikers more, although most recognised the importance of the woodlands to other groups such as horse-riders and walkers. Other replies expressed views on the use of native tree species (both for and against), the potential for conflicting use of the woods by different user groups, and on their opinion that the plan needed to talk more about biodiversity management.

Of the 31 responses to question 2 (how well does the plan address your needs and interests or those of your organisation?), roughly two thirds of respondents answered OK, Well or Very Well, while the remainder answered Poor or Very Poor. Although generally positive, the majority of respondents still have concerns about representation of the views of mountain bikers, and conflicts between user groups similar to the answers to question 1.

Forestry England’s response:
Our Forest Plans are strategic documents, and not intended to deal with site-specific recreation management issues (other than to show our awareness of them where necessary). Our Land Management and Recreation Teams will continue to engage with different user-groups about how we manage our woods for their benefit.

In areas of Planted Ancient Woodland with non-native trees, we will continue to gradually restore to native species as dictated by Government policy, and by the need to make our woods more resilient to climate change.