We Asked, You Said, We Did

We asked

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.

You said

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.

We did

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.

We asked

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.

You said

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.

We did

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.

We asked

For your responses and feedback to the draft 2023 Grizedale Forest Plan. Parish councils were notified for comment and shared the plan amongst residents, and posters were placed in car parks, forest entrances and the visitor’s centre.

You said

Our consultation received 22 responses from members of the public raising a wide range of topics. Positive comments included praise for the quick clean-up of key routes following storm Arwen, and appreciation for the forest environment we manage. Constructive criticism and negative comments were mostly regarding recreation infrastructure; however some forest management concerns were also raised.  

We did

Comments regarding recreation infrastructure in the forest. Forest plans don’t directly address recreation – they are land management documents for long-term forest management and resilience. Many comments from mountain bikers regarding condition of existing infrastructure, potential for provision of more trails and working with other groups, and the bike shop. Comments relating to cycling infrastructure have been passed to the relevant recreation staff. The North Face trail has been closed following the winter storms and plans are being made to reinstate and enhance this offer in 2023-24, taking into account the views of customers and our onsite bike hire provider. Some comments drawing attention to the omission of horse riders from the plan The forest plan has been updated to include reference to horse riders as well as walkers and cyclists. Horse riders should be reassured that Grizedale will continue to offer over 80km of roads and paths, and 32km of bridleway open for use by horse riders. For more information on horse riding in Grizedale, please see the following webpage:  https://www.forestryengland.uk/grizedale/horse-riding-grizedale Comments about potential for improved provision for motorsport and vehicle users on unsurfaced county roads (UCRs). Motorsport events in the forest are managed through a national agreement between Forestry England and Motorsport UK. Please contact your relevant Motorsport UK club if you have an idea for additional events or improvements for motorsport in the forest in the future. UCRs present in the forest are managed by the local highway’s authority and concerns about their condition or potential changes to these roads should be directed to Cumbria County Council, or Westmorland and Furness Council from 1st April 2023. Concern about damage to potentially rare roadside vegetation We welcome any information members of the public may have about interesting flora or fauna in the forest. If you have spotted a species of interest, we would encourage you to record this find using the iNaturalist application as part of our ‘Forest Find’ project, this way the species found can be recorded and protected as appropriate. For more information on the Forest Find project, see the following webpage: https://www.forestryengland.uk/forest-find Concerns about Forestry England’s deer management and squirrel management strategies Deer numbers can become too large for their habitat to support them. Grazing by large populations of deer reduces plants and animal diversity in the forest which can in turn affect soils and release carbon. Deer can also damage or kill young trees by damaging bark and lower branches, preventing forests from regenerating. We manage deer populations to look after our forests sustainably. Our highly skilled wildlife rangers replace the role of Britain’s missing predators by sensitively and humanely controlling deer populations in woods. Our expert staff use trained working dogs to track and find deer. For more information on Forestry England's deer policy, please see the following webpage: https://www.forestryengland.uk/article/managing-deer-the-nations-forests Similarly grey squirrels represent a risk to restocking operations, and also have a significant impact on woodland biodiversity, and in particular the native red squirrel. As such Forestry England staff work with Red Squirrels Northern England to humanely control the population of grey squirrel in the forest. Concerns about suspected trail hunting Forestry England suspended trail hunting in the nation’s forests in 2020, and this activity is currently under review.   If you suspect unauthorised hunting is taking place in the forest or on land we manage, please visit the following webpage: https://www.forestryengland.uk/trail-hunting Concerns about the use of chemicals in the forest At Grizedale forest we make use of fallow periods between felling and restock to minimise the need for use of insecticides, however in some instances the targeted application of pesticides is necessary to ensure successful planting takes place.   The use of chemicals in forestry settings is closely regulated. Forestry England operations are planned using the principles set out in the UK Forestry Standard, and are certified against the UK Woodland Assurance Standard by an independent auditor. For more information about how we apply chemicals, please see section 6.7 of the UK Forestry Standard, and Section 3.4 of the UK Woodland Assurance Standard.

We asked

The external consultation for the Long Mynd Forest Plan was open for six weeks in January / February 2023. Posters were put up at six points where public rights of way enter the forest, directing people to an online survey. In addition, emails were sent specifically to organisations and groups who we felt have an interest in how the site is managed eg parish councils, the Commoners Association and the local mountain biking shop.

You said

Six of the 19 respondents to the survey describe themselves as neighbours / forest users. Seven responses were received from members of the Long Mynd and District Bridleways Association. The other respondents were Historic England, Shropshire Council's Historic Environment Team, Natural England, the National Trust and the Shopshire Hills AONB.

We did

Feedback from forest users was generally positive:

• “Looks well thought through to me – good balance of objectives”
• “Thank you for this amazing forest”

although there was disappointment that the plan does not say much about mountain biking.

Forestry England comment:

• Our Forest Plans don’t directly address recreation – they are about land management for long-term forest protection and resilience. We will make sure that the scope of Forest Plans is explained more clearly within the plan itself in future.

One respondent was concerned about litter and asked what we can do to prevent it.

Forestry England comment:

• We don’t see too much litter at Long Mynd and are reluctant to put up posters which can detract from the sense of remoteness that makes this forest so special. Unfortunately, we just have to rely on forest users being respectful and taking their litter home.

And someone else asked us to “stop cutting down trees”.

Forestry England comment:

• Cutting down trees is part of the cycle of sustainable forest management at Long Mynd. We plant them, look after them, and then cut them down to provide timber. It can look quite dramatic when an area has been cleared of trees, but the next stage is to restock and begin to grow the next generation of trees. For more information, please have a look at our website www.forestryengland.uk.

 

The responses from the Long Mynd and District Bridleways Association expressed their concerns that they hadn’t been consulted directly and therefore had not had time to formulate a response.

Forestry England comment:

• We thought that we had contacted all the relevant local groups and apologise for omitting the Bridleways Association. If you would like to discuss the plan, please feel free to email us.

 

Historic England and the Shropshire Council Historic Environment Team were pleased to see the inclusion of a scheduled monument plan for the bronze age bowl barrow, but pointed out that unscheduled historic features should be protected too.

Forestry England comment:

• We mark all historic features that we are aware of on our maps so that they are protected during forest operations. This should’ve been stated in the plan and has now been added to the final version.

 

Natural England, the National Trust and the Shropshire Hills AONB recognise the challenge of balancing competing land uses – timber production, recreation, biodiversity – and appreciate that our Forest Plan places the creation of dynamic habitat high up on our agenda.

However, they would have liked us to create a greater amount of dynamic habitat to act as a buffer between the forest and the neighbouring heathland SSSI, and would like us to move away from a forest dominated by conifers managed by clearfelling, towards greater habitat diversity and variety of management systems, in order to protect soils and watercourses.

Forestry England comments:

• We need to write a plan that is realistic and achievable. In addition to the creation of 1.89ha of new dynamic habitat, we will (in the next few years) be restoring an area (2.49ha) on the western side of the site which was open and has become dominated by trees – this will add to the dynamic habitat, as will the 10% of ‘unstocked’ space that is recommended in all of our planting areas.

• We are, of course, aware of the importance of the neighbouring SSSI, which is why we have committed to further extending the buffer on the western edges of the forest over the coming decades.

• We have recently restocked the area in the northern part of the site with conifers, but with a broadleaf strip along the edge of the streams / SSSI.

• Sustainable forest management is a long-term business – we cannot transform conifer forest to broadleaf / open / heathland overnight, but as trees reach economic maturity, we will fell them and look at each area individually to ensure that what replaces them delivers for timber production, jobs, carbon sequestration, biodiversity and people.

• With regard to how forests impact on streams and soils, Forestry England is UKWAS certified and we manage all operations to UKWAS and UKFS best practice. Each operation goes through a site planning process before it is approved, meaning that the constraints and opportunities for each individual location are considered carefully.

• In the past, Long Mynd has been managed predominantly as no-thin conifer plantation. In future, we are moving towards thinning many more of the stands on the site, which will create a more open forest structure, possibly generating opportunities for alternatives to clearfell in the future, once we see how the thinned stands respond to wind and storms.

Forestry England – westenglandplanning@forestryengland.uk

February 2023

We asked

The external consultation for the Chase and Penyard Forest Plan was open for six weeks in November / December 2022. Posters were put up at entrances to both woods, directing people to an online survey.

You said

The majority of the 23 respondents to the survey describe themselves as walkers, mountain bikers and neighbours, but there were also comments from Historic England and the Gloucestershire Raptor Monitoring Group.

All 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:

• “Visitors are bowled over by [the woods’] accessibility.”

• “These are some of the best woods in the country.”

• “The report is pleasingly thorough.”

We did

Some respondents expressed concern about the increasing number of mountain bikers, while other believe that there should be designated mountain biking areas in both woods, and asked why mountain biking is not covered in more detail in the forest plan.

Forestry England’s response:

• Our forest plans don’t directly address recreation – they are more about land management for long-term forest management and resilience.
• Our ‘Unauthorised Trails Guidance’ is that “cycling can be tolerated on paths, tracks and trails (natural or desire lines) away from the authorised network so long as Forestry England determine there is no significant wildlife disturbance or damage to historic features and there is no significant danger posed to other forest users or those using them.” We appeal to riders to act responsibly.

 

Other concerns included:

• “Environmental objectives should be given a higher priority in these woods.”

Forestry England’s response:

• • Protection and enhancement of habitats is a high priority for us. We are excited about the proposal to create glades along the ridesides in Chase Wood and to carry out sweet chestnut coppicing in Penyard, both of which will benefit wildlife.

 

• “Plan may eventually produce Chase too dominated by oak.”

Forestry England’s response:

• • This was something we discussed when writing the plan. Over time, as the oaks are thinned, gaps will be created, into which we can plant more varied species mixtures in order to diversify and increase resilience.

We asked

The external consultation for the Bristol Woods forest plan was open for five weeks in April / May 2022. Posters at the main entrances to each of the publicly accessible woods directed people to an online survey.

You said

The majority of the 87 respondents to the survey were recreational users of the woods. There was also useful feedback from national and local organisations including Natural England, Historic England and Abbots Leigh Wildlife Group.

Positive comments included:

“I feel the plan addresses natural capital regeneration, species diversity and climate change mitigation very well.”

“It seems to me that the plan is excellent and balances the priorities of biodiversity, timber production and amenity.”

Some concerns were raised - these are listed below.

We did

The actions relating to Leigh Court registered park and garden are a bit vague and it isn’t clear how they have been decided.

Forestry England’s response:

• A conservation statement for Leigh Court will be produced within the first year of the forest plan. In the meantime, actions are based on discussions with the Forestry England Historic Environment Team and assessments of past management objectives.

 

People / organisations with an interest in biodiversity provided some really useful feedback:

Forestry England’s response:

• According to our records, West Tanpit Wood is not recorded as ancient woodland. However, we will investigate the suggestion that it is, and ensure that forest operations and future planting are adjusted if needed. Also, while it may appear that there is a lot of felling due, it is spread over at least 3 decades, and is mostly non-native larch which is potentially at risk of infection from Phytophthora ramorum.
• Important species and habitats, including the stream in West Tanpit, Tilia cordata in Leigh Woods, and butterflies and other insects will be mentioned more prominently in the plan and the relevant comments from the online survey passed to our ecologist.

 

There were some questions about pests and diseases.

Forestry England’s response:

• We will protect coppice regrowth from deer damage wherever possible using temporary fencing.
• Ash dieback remains a challenge and will require some further felling eg in Ashton Hill, but we hope that by replacing the ash with more diverse mixtures, we will increase the resilience of the Bristol Woods for the future.

 

There were several comments from mountain bikers:

Forestry England’s response:

• Forestry England has supported mountain biking for many years. Unfortunately, we cannot allow bike trails everywhere, especially in the fragile habitats of the Leigh Woods SSSI and surrounding areas, where native broadleaves will be planted to replace recently cleared conifers. The local Forestry England team will continue to work closely with Ride Bristol as representatives of the cycling community.

 

Other comments and suggestions, including offers from potential volunteers have been passed onto the local beat team, who will contact individuals and groups as and when appropriate.

We asked

For feedback on our plans to fell larch trees in Ennerdale in response to Phytophthora Ramorum.

You said

Various concerns were raised about the plans including timber transport, future production, access during the operations and communications plans.

We did

Questions were collated and a response document is viewable on the Wild Ennerdale website.

Link to response document.

We asked

The external consultation for Friston was open for six weeks in October / November 2021. Posters were put up at entrances, directing people to an online survey and providing contact details for any further queries.

You said

There were 21 responses in total via the online consultation in addition to several responses from statutory and non-statutory organisations. Overall, the plan was met favourably, with 57% classing it as well or very well addressing their needs. Less than 5% considered it to poorly meet their needs. The primary interests of respondents focussed on woodland ecology and the balance of people and nature.

We did

The responses will be further considered and factored into the plan where possible. Several of the specific suggestions relating to balancing human use of the forest go beyond what the forest plan is designed for; however, these will nonetheless be considered a priority area for discussion and action over the coming months and years. Forestry England is committed to ensuring the sustainable use of the nation's forests and recognises that this often requires active management. Based off the feedback provided from this consultation the management will be reviewed.

This forest plan has now been submitted to the Forestry Commission for further scrutiny and approval.

We asked

The external consultation for Rendlesham and Tunstall was open for 30 days from 27th September 2021-26th October 2021. The public were directed to an online consultation via posters put up across both woodlands, letters posted through the doors of forest residents and social media posts. We directly emailed 35 stakeholders including parish councils to inform them of the consultation. 

The consultation also provided contact details for further queries to be made.

You said

There were 117 responses to the consultation with 98 of those being through the online questionnaire. Overall, the plan was met favourably, with 66% classing it as well or very well addressing their needs.The majority of respondees also felt the plan acheived a balance of social, economic and environmental objectives. The primary interests of the respondants focused on biodiversity and woodland ecology, forest protection and climate change.

The key concerns raised included the following:

• The main silvicultural management system for the plan area will be through clear fell operations and some belived this meant large areas of woodland would be removed and replaced with heathland.
• Felling trees reduces carbon sequestration contributing to climate change. Planting more trees was favoured over removal, but where trees are removed consideration for more sensitive management methods was requested.
• Unclear as to when coupes will be restocked following felling operations.
• Dominance of conifer as a species in the woodland. Requests to remove conifer and plant more broadleaf were recieved. 
• Consultation period is too short, questions are ambiguous and face to face meetings should be carried out.
• Improvement and development of recreation facilities is needed but not covered in the plan. Particular reference to cycle trails, walking trails and play equipment was made. Also requests for better horse box parking facilities in Tunstall.

We did

The responses have been considered and factored into the plan where possible. The key concerns raised above have been addressed in the following way:

• The plan does not propose to clear fell large areas of woodland and replace it with heathland. The plan area totals 2,514ha and shows over the 10 year approval period that 148ha of conifer woodland will be felled, 64ha in Tunstall and 84ha in Rendlesham. The majority of these areas will be fully restocked after 2 years as detailed in the felling and restock maps within the plan.
• Further information has been added to the plan on the forest resilience page to explain how using renewable resources such as timber can continue to sequester carbon and help tackle climate change.
• The plan does state felled areas will be restocked after 2 years but this was previously only in the monioritng table of the plan. This information has now been added on an additional page within the main text.
• The plan states the use of conifer as a species and clear felling is determined by the SSSI and SPA designation of both woodlands for the Woodlark and Nightjar. However, further information on the importance of conifer in productive forestry has been added to the finance section of the plan.
• The online consultation followed national policy and provided a 30 day period for comments to be made. A few respondees had strong views the questions were ambiguous. These concerns have been raised with the national team who have contacted all other districts to determine whether this has been raised in any other forest plan consultations across the country. It concluded no other consultation raised these concerns. However, the national team will review the questions used and consider changes.
• There are 319 parish councils across the East Forest District making face to face meetings impractical. However, due to a number of concerns raised a face to face meeting was held in Tunstall on 6th December 2021, providing the community with the chance to ask questions.
• Recreation improvements/developments are outside the scope of the forest plan but the comments recieved will be passed to the recreation team for consideration.

This plan has now been sent to Forest Services, the regulatory arm of the Forestry Commission, for further consultation before approval. Parish Councils will be informed once the plan is on the public register for comment.

We asked

The external consultation for the Frith and Conigree forest plan was open for five weeks in April / May 2021. Posters were put up at entrances to both woods, directing people to an online survey.

You said

There were 90 responses to the survey, mostly from walkers / forest users and neighbours, with comments from a footpath officer and a Scout leader, and representatives of the Conigree freeholder, Malvern Hills AONB, Ledbury Town Council and Sustainable Ledbury.

82% of respondents said that the forest plan addresses their needs and interests (or those of their organisation) ‘very well’ or ‘well’, with plenty of positive feedback.

We did

More detail about the responses is provided in the results section of the consultation below.

We asked

Members of the public were asked to comment on the proposal of a new wildflower meadow at Pages Wood. This consultation was shared on multiple Facebook pages and local Facebook groups, and notices were displayed on site at Pages Wood.

You said

There were 332 responses to the survey: 89% within 20 minutes travelling distance from Pages Wood (with the majority of people walking or cycling to the site). We have considered everyone's comments and nearly all the responses were very positive for more wildflowers at Pages Wood. We also took this opportunity to ask for feedback on the facilities at Pages Wood, all of which were voted ‘OK’ by the majority of respondents, except the sculptures and woodland trails which were voted as ‘good’ by the majority of respondents. 

We did

Following the overwhelmingly positive response to the wildflower meadow at Pages Wood, Forestry England will proceed with plans and the necessary surveys to carry this out. Thank you to everyone who took the time to complete this survey.

We asked

Members of the public and stakeholders were invited to the consultation of the draft proposals for the High Stand Forest Plan 2021-2031, to leave feedback to ensure that the plans objectives and proposals were considered and balanced. This was carried out via emails and notices displayed in the forest. 

You said

There were a handful of responses to the consultation from members of the public, with most supporting the forest management objectives. The main points and concerns raised include the following:

• Continued focus on High Stand as a wildlife habitat
• Continued focus on quiet community use is welcomed
• More to be done to reduce antisocial behaviour around car park

We did

Comments and feedback were incorporated into the Forest Plan where necessary.

High Stand is valued by the local community for its relatively low visitor numbers and quiet community feel, this is something this Forest Plan aims to continue with no objectives to increase visitor numbers. Many members of public identified the wide range of species who call High Stand home and recognise the role the forest plays in providing these habitats. This Forest Plan seeks to continue the management principles which have allowed these habitats to flourish in the past, including management of trackside verges for butterflies and moths. This has been made a clear in the Forest Plan following feedback.

Forest Plans primarily focus on woodland management. The proposals to address antisocial behaviour in the High Stand plan focus on woodland management solutions to these issues, such as thinning the area around the car park to increase visibility from the public road. Additional suggestions such as the use of cameras and height barriers have been passed onto the appropriate team for consideration.

This forest plan has now been submitted to the Forestry Commission for approval.

We asked

Forestry England manages Bedgebury National Pinetum and Forest - Park Lane is a section of public highway, private road and forest track that transects the forest. Over recent years the displaced parking has become unsustainable and has created incidents of unsafe parking, legitimate road users have had their access blocked, including the emergency services. We consulted residents and neighbours on Park Lane and presented three options to address the current situation for a wider consultation.

You said

There were 386 responses to the survey; 8% were from residents or local businesses on Park Lane, 43% were from residents of Hawkhurst Parish, 26% of Cranbrook & Sissinghurst and 6% of Goudhurst. The remaining 17% were from none of the above. The most popular option was number 3 - to regulate parking, potentially with a locally administrated pass. 61% of respondents chose this option and a further 30% said that they would support this option even though it was not their first choice – a combined total of 91%. Furthermore, 59% said that this option was fair to all user groups. 

We did

Following this survey, with a good representation from each parish as well as different user groups, Forestry England will move ahead with plans to regulate parking.

Forestry England Park Lane parking consultation - full results

We asked

Members of the public and stakeholders were invited to the consultation of the draft proposals for the Broughton Moor Forest Plan 2020-2030, to leave feedback to ensure that the plans objectives and proposals were considered and balanced. This was carried out via emails and notices displayed at forest entrances. 

You said

There were a handful of responses to the consultation from members of the public, with most supporting the main forest management objectives. The main concerns raised include the following:

-The impact of larch felling in Broughton Moor 

-Demand for mountain biking facilities in Broughton Moor

-Questions around Public Right of Way maintenance

-Concerns around illegal motorbike access

We did

Comments and feedback were incorporated into the Forest Plan where necessary.

The concern around the impact of larch felling in Broughton Moor is understandable given the prominence of this species in areas of the forest, particularly around The Hawk. The issuing of a statutory plant health notice and the ongoing threat to the larch trees in the area necessities that we act now, to reduce the risk to other trees in the area. In addition, the planned restocking containing a higher proportion of broadleaves when compared to the previous plan aims to reduce the landscape impact in the long term that losing the larch will cause.

Creation of cycle trails is outside of the scope of this forest management plan, however the feedback for additional cycling provision has been passed onto the recreation team for their consideration. Grizedale is Forestry England’s hub for mountain biking and supports numerous trails. There are no formal cycle paths or trails in Broughton Moor.

We remain committed to monitoring illegal motorbike activity in Broughton Moor and will continue to liaise with the police regarding this matter.

The Public Rights of Way within Broughton Moor are the responsibility of the National Park authority to maintain, and these comments have been passed onto the appropriate staff there.

This forest plan has now been submitted to the Forestry Commission for approval.

We asked

We asked people to provide feedback on proposed plans for some development work at Tyler's Wood. Thank you for your responses.

You said

There was a positive response to the consultation. The majority of respondents supported the development of more wildflowers, pathways, trees, a pond and additional seating. There was a strong interest in ensuring our forest wildlife continues to thrive and that the benefits of our forests will continue for generations to come. The majority of respondents stay up to date with our sites through the Facebook page (Thames Chase Woodlands - Forestry England) and notice boards on the site. We will continue to use these platforms and keep them up to date. There was some interest in volunteering on this project. We will continue to review Covid-19 guidance and advertise for volunteers if and when we feel it is safe to do so.

We did

Comments and feedback have been reviewed and incorporated into the development plan for Tyler's Wood. Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire.

We asked

We asked people to leave feedback on the newly drafted Forest Plan for Haugh Woods.  Thank you for your responses.

This forms part of our consultation with stakeholders, that helps to ensure that we achieve an appropriate balance when managing the woodlands.

 

You said

Overall there was positive support for the land management proposals within the new Forest Plan. 

There was concern over potential conflicts in use between walkers and mountain bikers and the impacts that deer and grey squirrel may have on broadleaf regeneration.

 

 

 

We did

Comments have been shared with the Forestry England beat forester, ecologist and recreation teams.  

The Forest Plan has now been submitted to the Forestry Commission for approval.

We asked

Members of the public and stakeholders were invited to the consultation of the draft proposals for the Bernwood Forest Plan 2019-2029, to leave feedback to ensure that the plans objectives and proposals were considered and balanced. This was carried out via emails and notices displayed in the freehold woodlands in the plan area.

You said

There were very few responses to the consultation but primarily there was good support for the proposals with the majority agreeing that the plan achieves an appropriate balance of social, economic and environmental objectives for the woodland. The main concerns raised include the following:

-  Limited heritage data shown on the maps and a request to carry out further surveys of archaeological features and share this data with HER was made.

-  Why a reduction of 25% of core habitat for black & brown hairstreaks is considered acceptable in the SSSI management objectives table and does this mean that no more than 25% will be managed.

-  The text related to the production forecast should be changed to ensure this shows a per annum figure as this currently implies the volume is the forecast over a 5 year period.

We did

Comments and feedback were incorporated into the forest plan where necessary.

The request to carry out further surveys of archaeological features has been passed to the beat team and the East District FE Historic Environment Advisor to assess the practicalities of this. It should be noted that the plan does state archaeology is assessed as part of the OSA process before any work commences, and the county archaeologists would be consulted at this stage. A guidebook of protecting heritage features is also provided to staff to increase their understanding of heritage features.

The concern relating to the reduction of 25% of core habitat for the black & brown hairstreaks was raised with the East District Ecologist. This statement was taken from the favourable condition tables written for the woodland by Natural England which follow national guidelines. Although the aim is to maintain and improve habitat it is recognised that this may not always be possible to achieve and 25% is considered a reasonable reduction, and this does not mean only 25% will be managed. The ride and scrub management maps within the plan appendices show there is no intention of reducing ride management. Favourable condition table assessments are carried out by Natural England and these currently show that all units are either in favourable or unfavourable-recovering condition, showing gradual improvements are being made. Areas in unfavourable-recovering condition are those which still contain conifer which as the plan shows will be removed overtime either through clear fell or thinning operations.

We asked

We asked people to leave some feedback on the newly drafted Forest Plan that saw three Plans being amalgamated to cover Kinsley, Bucknell, Bucknell Wood, Bedstone Hill, Hopton, Well Wood and Purslow.

This forms part of our consultation with stakeholders, that helps to ensure that we achieve an appropriate balance of objectives.

You said

Overall there was positive support for proposals within the new Forest Plan.  There was concern over horseriding and cycling, and the adequate provision of facilities for horse riding.

Interest in the ecology of the forests and proposals also featured highly.

We did

Comments and feedback were incorporated into the Forest Plan where necessary prior to sumission to Forest Services (FS) for approval.  Concerns over recreational provisons along with ecological interest were fed to the Recreation team and Operational Managers for their consideration.

25/01/19 forest Plan has now been submitted for approval to forest Services.

We asked

Members of the public and stakeholders were invited to the consultation of the draft proposals for the North Norfolk Forest Plan 2018-2028, to leave feedback to ensure that the plans objectives and proposals were considered and balanced. This was carried out via letters, emails and notices displayed in freehold woodlands across the plan area.

You said

Primarily there was good support for the proposals with the majority of you agreeing that the plan achieves an appropriate balance of social, economic and environmental objectives for the woodland. Common features raised included requests to increase open space, more detailed information on specific management of conservation plans and concerns over the minerals plan for Bintree forest.

We did

Comments and feedback were incorporated into the forest plan where necessary. Suggestions made to increase open space in Marsham, Horsford and Edgefield could not be implemented as permanent open space identified across the plan area is currently in poor condition. This will be addressed within a conservation plan to follow but at this stage it would be impractical to commit to increasing open space until what we have is managed appropriately. The conservation plan will contain more detailed information about specific management of conservation areas for use at the operational level. The plan shows Bintree forest will used for forestry purposes in the immediate future. However, concerns raised regarding the minerals plan for Bintree have been passed to the estates department to retain on file. The plan will now be submitted to Forest Services (FS) for approval. It is hoped this process will be completed by September 2018 and that the approved plan will be displayed on the East England Forest plans pages by October 2018.

We asked

Members of the public were invited to the consultation of the draft proposals for the Shobdon and Wigmore Forest Plan to leave feedback to ensure that the plans objectives and proposals were considered and balanced.

You said

Primarily there was good support for the proposals. including the restoration of PAW sites, although there were concerns raised over definition of PAW sites within the plan area.

Interest in the ecology of the forests and proposals to enhance and improve the ecological value of the forests also featured highly.

We did

Comments and feedback were incorporated into the Forest Plan where nescessary, prior to submission to Forest Services (FS) for approval. FS had no feedback from their consultation and the plan was approved for implementation on 20th December 2017