Organisers of a campaign to stop the Government selling off the Lake District’s publicly owned forests have announced plans for a rally in Grizedale Forest at 1pm on Sunday 30th January.
The Government is about to launch a consultation on selling off England’s public forests, including more than 30 forests and woodlands across the Lake District such as Grizedale, Whinlatter and Ennerdale. Legislation is also going through Parliament that would give ministers the power to sell off all the forests currently managed by the Forestry Commission.
The rally will hear speeches from Lord Clark of Windermere, a former Chairman of the Forestry Commission and the chair of the All Party Group on Forestry in Parliament; Eric Robson who is the Chairman of Cumbria Tourism and the Wainwright Society; Jack Ellerby from Friends of the Lake District; and the chair of Save Lakeland’s Forests Paul Townsend.
Lord Clark says: “This is a great opportunity to send a signal to the Government, MPs and members of the House of Lords about the strength of opposition to selling off the public forests. This is not just about the Government’s consultation. The more urgent need is to do everything possible to change the Public Bodies Reform Bill to stop ministers being able to sell off these forests; and the first chance to do that will be in the House of Lords in the next few weeks.
“I urge as many people as possible to come to Grizedale Forest on Sunday 30th of January - walkers, mountain bikers, families, and people walking their dogs - just as millions of people do in our public forests every year. If we don’t stand up now and show how much these wonderful green spaces mean to us we risk losing them forever.”
The rally will take place on the meadow next to the main car park at Grizedale near Hawkshead.
Eric Robson says: “Selling off the public forests in the Lake District would be a disaster for tourism in this beautiful corner of the country and for biodiversity. Whatever ministers try to tell us, they cannot guarantee the same level of public access to these forests if they are sold off or the same high standards of environmental protection. Trying to suggest otherwise is simply misleading.”
After the speeches people will be encouraged to write comments about what the public forests mean to them on cards in the shape of a tree, which will be taken to Parliament by Lord Clark.
The campaign to Save Lakeland’s Forests was launched this month by Paul Townsend, a former parish councillor, who lives at Satterthwaite near Grizedale, and has already received national media attention. The campaign has even been contacted by French TV.
Thousands of people have visited the campaign website – www.savelakelandsforests.org.uk – and hundreds of people are also following the group’s updates on Facebook and Twitter. Nationally, over 160,000 people have signed a petition organised by 38 degrees against the Government plans.
Paul Townsend commented “We’ve been delighted by the amount of support we’ve been getting. There have been many messages of support and offers to help the campaign. It shows just how much the Lake District’s forests and woodlands mean to people – not just those who live here but many people across the whole country.
“It’s important for people to come along and show their support on Sunday. It’ll be a great day out and a chance for us all to play our part in putting a stop to the Government’s plans to sell off our forests.
“We’d also encourage everyone to sign the national petition organised by 38 degrees. There’s a link to the petition on our website as well as details about how to contact your local MP and the Environment Secretary.”
13 comments:
Are you going Glady's you should.
You may be in church?
I was brought up Catholic and felt guilty about missing mass to go to the mountains and forests till I met a wise franciscan monk
Who said "It is better being in the mountains thinking of God than being in church thinking of the mountains"
JAK
Who's Glady ?
("Glady's")
What to do with these 'bloody ' apostrophes.
I nearly wrote (who'se)!
As for me - it depends on 'family commitments'.
Dear sir
Thank you it may only look like a spec of dust but its very important.
As I now have a tribe for a family I find the more time I give an acquaintance the less time I have for a loved one.
Or a nice long hot bath.
JAK
So much for fair and balanced reporting. As is the norm for GD we read only the bits he agrees with/approves of and all we hear of the ever so nasty government's stance is that they want to "sell off" the forests.
I'd like to hear a bit more about HMG's stance. Personally I really couldn't give a monkeys about the forests. Anything that minimises the Lake Districts role as a playground for well off offcomers and tree huggers is fine by me (within reason). I suppose its safe to presume that nobody will be building car factories or power stations in the woods - so, please explain - what is the problem?
Come on George; this is my blog.
It reflects my views.
Of course it's biased.
You're welcome to put an alternative view.
Sadly for you I aways can have the last word.
Dear Pink Hippo
I'd like to hear more about HMG's stance and plans as they sell something that was mine.
Forests are for the less well off this is about to change.
I salute Geoff for iformation, opinions that are of intrest your contribution made me yawn.
No wonder the girls cried.
Zippy
As I understand it the forests would be sold on a leasehold basis to private individuals, companies or even charities. Public access will remain unaffected. OK, you may have to pay a quid or two to gain entry, so what? The country is broke. Genuinely, I cannot see a problem nor did I ever feel the forests were/are "mine". I didn't get a free bag of logs at Christmas!!
Dear Pink Hippo'
Your understanding and knowledge is sadly lacking!
As your statements indicate you do not care or use the forests and you have no milk of human kindness or green credentials I do not have to search for a word SELFISH.
Did you go to Eaton?
You must have missed Sir Chris Bonnington on Radio Cumbria yesterday morning try to find it on BBCI player
I do not support lame ducks but why ruin for ever something that is precious and works.
I to didn’t get a bag of logs at Christmas but I did enjoy exercise in a beautiful setting Grisedale above Coniston
The girls cry on and boys run away well named.
Be carefull George !
Nearly two centuries after King George III famously mistook a large tree for a Prussian king, peed red- and blue-tinged urine, and died blind, deaf, and mad, scientists are still finalizing his diagnosis.
Check your urine.
Zippy
George, the biggest argument of popular appeal against the sell off is that a thriving business is being sold off.
Not only does it sell wood etc but it helps to sells tourism and has great potential to earn valuable foreign currency, helping us deal the balance of payments and the large amount of spending on Chinese goods.
Furthermore it provides jobs under regulated conditions.
At the moment the public has no reason to trust the present government not to serve the interests of the rich.
What will make little difference to our way of life is to sell something really valuable that earns no money for the country :
The crown jewels.
True they have a limited tourist appeal but they are a reminder of a dubious past.
Instead of selling the forests why not provide work in them for young people out of work - improving paths - putting up effective and well designed signs that will encourage visitors to come and enjoy our countryside - getting fit - enjoying the scenery and fresh air - as has been done in France.
How about signs like Harter Fell 1 hour 20min ( walking time).
Oh I get it now. Its a conspiracy by the evil robber barons to deprive the peasantry of their "rights" and make a few groats on the side to fuel their decadent and immoral lifestyles. Much the same as Sellafield is a conspiracy to poison the entire North of England and a good bit of Ireland (is it any wonder I have no green credentials and am rather happy with that?!!).
Straight out of the Guardian letters page. I despise you lot, always looking for hidden agendas to whinge about! Selfish? Moi? It rather strikes me that those who wander through "my" woods complete with stout boots and packed lunch and those who find amusement in charging about on mountain bikes are in the minority and damned well want their way and sod the consequences.
Remember, this is only a consultation and is not set in stone. Reassurances have been given but you choose not to believe them as they emanate from the cruel Tory government and their Lib/Dem lackeys. Keep your powder dry and start whingeing - if you must - after the consultation and there are concrete proposals on the table.
Yes Zippy, I did attend one of the more elevated public schools. You should know that as such, I do not need to pee. I am able to employ a man to do that for me and as I write he is in full flow in the WC, sounding like the Co-op horse.Close inspection of the steaming stream shows no trace of
colour or cloud. It is crystal clear, unlike your thoughts on this subject.
Please note: no longer a Guardian reader as though there were some excellent articles and found it too biased.
Where is 'the truth' anyway?
And GD, you would never publish anything biased would you? (see your ealier post above).
Of course I would.
Have you read my previous comments on this?
Everything anyone says is biased.
The only thing that I've come across that is not biased is mathemetics, whilst the High Court judgements try extremely hard to avoid it - and succeed for the most part in my opinion.
They, I learnt on TV the other night attempt to carefully apply logic based on the existing law.
Sometimes, in difficult cases their logic disagrees, so we have to put up with a 'dodgey' decision until next time round.
Don't you think, George, that the judgement of the Coalition is suspect until they have overhauled the bank system that contributed to the present mess.
Don't you also distrust them when they repeatedly say that the solution is 'growth'. The planet cannot sustain 'growth'.
So what 'growth' really means is greed - grabbing an unfair proportion of the resources in a similar way to that being practiced effectively by the Chinese.
Doesn't this in the long run lead to terrorism? As the third world attempt to hit back?
Post a Comment