AIBU to think that the Government shouldn't be flogging off the country's forests?

[donkeyderby]

fctu.org.uk/saveourforests/index.asp

I received an email today from a Save Our Forests campaigner which read:

'The Government is currently passing legislation, which will enable them to sell of all of the state-owned forests in England - i.e. everything owned and managed by the Forestry Commission (up to 2m acres). This is expected to go through within 2-3 weeks, whereupon the whole lot will be sold to private buyers.

Legislation covering public access will not apply to all public forest estate, and whilst access on foot will be protected in some instances, there is no requirement to allow cycle or horse riding, or to maintain facilities such as car parks, walks and forest trails.

This seems to us to be gross public vandalism, which will seriously harm the environment in which we live - not only from a nature/preservation point of view, but also in terms of our recreation and well-being.'

If you are as horrified by this as I am, please sign the petition

Will sign the petition. This is a terrible idea.

YANBU

There is a facebook page as well. Spread the word

Shocking. I have signed the petition.

I disagree entirely and fully support this move by the Government. Private enterprise will create jobs through its use of the forests and, let's face it, jobs have to be a good thing in this current climate.

pascoe let's hope the private companies will employ all those who lose their jobs when the Forestry Commission disappears then

In the words of the song pascoe28 'They paved paradise and put up a parking lot' Have signed....

I don't know, its not ideal but would you rather see more cuts or further tax rises.

Same thing happening in Ireland.

Another point to consider is not just the recreational benefits of the forestry but environmental.

As climate change gathers apace, it's relevent to consider WHO will have control of water tables, and carbon emission offsets.

Well it depends how they are going to sell them off, and if the new owners have to keep the trees.

Although I know at least one person who will be out of a job, since he maintains public forests along with huge numbers of other people.

Tax rises...

donkeyderby - public sector jobs are paid for by taxpayers...with our current deficit, this means they are a net cost (tax received from such workers is but a small proportion of the taxes that pay for such jobs).

Some FC jobs will go - but some will be re-employed by private companies (thereby making net contributions with their taxes).

Once said private companies beging to exploit the newly-acquired land (sustainable felling, leisure park development etc), more jobs will be created which, again, will make net tax contributions...helping to reduce deficit yet further.

A virtuous circle, if you will.

Well that's an optimistim outlook - shame it tends not to actually work like that.

Let's say the people that buy the forests have to maintain it themselves, but will be paid by government to do so (usual privitisation practice) to make a profit they have to run the forest on less money than the government spent, only way to do that is to cut costs ie jobs, wages and/or services.

Otoh, if they're selling it off for private use with no conditions, chopping down all those trees is likely to have extremely negative environmental impact - increased flooding in some areas, which would cost the public in clean-up costs.

"leisure park development" - actually no thanks - I'd rather the forests were left just as......well forests

I would rather pay more in taxes for a decent health & education system and to ensure a green and pleasant land for my grandchildren.

""leisure park development" - actually no thanks - I'd rather the forests were left just as......well forests".

I as well.

Me too Sarf.

here you go - this is what DRL Leisure Park Development company do

"Our work includes complete construction of roads, pump stations and sewerage systems; all services i.e. electricity, gas, water, BT lines, Wi-Fi and TV; all soft and hard landscaping, the formation of ponds, water features and SUDS areas both open and hidden areas."

I'm on a low income(benefits right now) - I've never once been to a leisure park (under any of it's definitions - holiday park, cinema/bowling type complex, or theme park etc) that didn't cost me money. Private enterprise will cost me more money - that I don't have. I want green spaces (and forests) to be able to take my children to that doesn't rely on me having £'s in the bank.

article on it [[http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-for-sale--camerons-green-credentials-2177929.html
here]]

"Private enterprise will cost me more money - that I don't have. I want green spaces (and forests) to be able to take my children to that doesn't rely on me having £'s in the bank."

Baroque - have you been to a cinema ever? A restuarant? Pub?

Did you expect other people (taxpayers) to pay for those trips as well?

Your intial sentence, "Private enterprise will cost me more money - that I don't have." is entirely apposite - keeping FC land on its books is costing the country money that it doesn't have.

The more I think about this, the more I disagree with it we are already a highly urbanised country and so should saviour the green spaces that we have. The measure will only raise about £2 billion which although not insignificant it is not the solution to the countries fiscal problems and mass deforestation could have serious impacts on biodiversity and flooding as forests are vital in both.