its only Englands forests Dom so you will be okay
(scotland is 60% of the FC's land, so this proposal only actually affects the 26% of all FC land that is in England and that is still only 40% of all the forestry in the country so its actually a very small amount that is affected)
Yes I can see it could affect biking in a bad way
but
private investment could be good, any owners will get next to nothing off forestry operations so will have to diversify for income
so long as its managed correctly and clauses put in that public access must remain then private investment could be good
Llandegla is a good example, thats not FC owned and has had big investment in biking over the last few years
With the correct owners it could actually see English trail centres get the kind of investment the FC has thrown at the 7 Staines and Welsh centres (England lags well behind to be honest and most building in England has been by volunteer organisations such as Chase Trails or Singletraction anyway, with minimal funding in England from FC compared to Scotland and Wales)
of course if its just a quick sell off with no consideration for existing 'priveledges' the public enjoy then yeah it could be a nightmare. Likewise if private companies decide rather than paying to park we have to pay to ride, then costs of visiting could go up, (but that would be much harder to implement and manage, how would they stop people from not joining the trail at the pay booths but elsewhere?)
The FC was set up post World War 1 when we only had 5% of land under forest, with most having been chopped down to fuel the Industrial Revolution and then the war effort. It was never particually effective at building up a strategic resource of timber but we do now have more than 10% of all land given up to forestry (still not alot when most of Europe is around 25%) and overseas timber is cheaper and generally more sustainable so the FC's original remit is not really applicable any more so I can kind of understand at least a little bit of the thinking behind selling it off, although that doesnt mean it is a good thing or that I agree with it especially as that original remit has changed over the years to also become a kind of environmental custodian, of which there is still a definate need for
Weather its good or bad for us very much depends on how the sell off is managed, and as there is likely to be alot of public opposition to it, as well as opposition from other bodies like the National Trust etc I can imagine that it will be quite controversal and have to be done properly and some similar degree of public access will have to be maintained. Of course the FC would still exist in some form (just own less land) and as commercial logging is only allowed with a permit from the FC the wholescale clear felling of forestry as people are predicting should 'in theory' not be likely to happen
I won't be getting to worried at the mo until further plans are announced, I will be signing the petition against it though -
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/save-our-forests#petition
Welcome, Guest. Please 
May 24, 2012, 10:37:19 AM
Author
