Is this the end of our woods?

Q What are the plans regarding the forests?

A The Government wants to sell off, on long leases, the commercially-viable parts of the public estate, give communities and local groups the right to buy or lease their woodlands and to hand over management of heritage forests to charity.

Ministers also want to end The Forestry Commission’s position as both regulator and the biggest player in the timber industry, leaving it with its regulatory, advisory and research roles.

Q How much forest are we talking about?

A The Forestry Commission owns about 258,000 hectares of land (638,000 acres), of which about 80 per cent is wooded and the remainder is other habitats, including heath and bogs. The public estate accounts for 18 per cent of England’s woodland.

The woods include large and small commercial plantations, multi-purpose woods that provide a range of benefits, including recreation and wildlife, recently-planted community forests and ancient woodland.

Q Why is the coalition Government doing it?

A The change to the Forestry Commission is because ministers feel it should not be regulator and biggest player in the English timber industry at the same time.

The move to offload the country’s forests also fits in with Prime Minister David Cameron’s vision of the “Big Society”, reducing the role of Government and giving communities more say in the management of their local assets.

There is also the small matter of the £140m to £250m that would be raised from selling the leaseholds of the commercially- valuable forests.

Q So what is all the fuss about?

A Rumours have been swirling, since news of the plans were first leaked, that the proposals would allow development in some of England’s most-loved forests and that people would lose access to woods.

The Government strenuously denies this would be the case, saying heritage forests would be protected by being put in the hands of charities which would care for them on behalf of the nation.

Q Has that denial placated people?

A No. Charities have pointed out the plans are unrealistic, as it takes more than – in the words of the Woodland Trust – “passing on a little bit of funding and using a few volunteers” to manage woodland.

And it is likely the plans would end up costing more than the current situation, in which the Forestry Commission costs about £20m a year in England to run.

Concerns also remain that the assurances given by the Government are not sufficient guarantees that access will be preserved.