THE FRIENDS OF EPPING FOREST

This letter summarises our key concerns and is supported and amplified by an attached Appendix of Extended Comments that follows section by section, the layout of the Corporation’s Consultation Document.

As you may be aware, the Friends of Epping Forest was formed in 1968 and has a current membership of some 2,000 individuals. Our Constitution requires us to endeavour to support the Conservators in upholding the provisions of the 1878 Act; in particular the requirement that the Forest shall remain as an open and unenclosed space for the recreation and enjoyment of the public ... and the natural aspect preserved as far as possible.

We welcomed the production of a ‘Consultation Document on Grazing’ and its availability for consultation. However the Document is regrettably very vague and consults only on whether grazing should occur. This is not the issue; indeed the 1878 Act requires grazing to be available for Commoners.

It is the extent of grazing and the consequences of the proposed development of grazing, which is the issue.

In its present form, the document is designed to promote a ‘yes’ response from the public – ‘we like cattle on the Forest’. But, we believe, this likely response does not in any way indicate the public’s willingness to accept the potential implications of grazing.

Our Response has been approved by our Committee after lengthy discussion and considerable input from our members, both in writing and in person. Our Committee, consisting of 16 members, has specific and wide knowledge of the Forest and the issues involved. Our membership has been fully informed through our Newsletters, notably the special edition late last year. Our members have been broadly supportive of the comments that appear here.

We have responded in such detail because we believe the decisions about to be considered will be as important and far reaching as any that have been taken since the passing of the Act in 1878. The impact of the proposed development of grazing we regard as constituting a dramatic far-reaching development in Forest management, that if implemented would bring about enormous changes in the Forest landscape and wildlife for decades to come.

We urge you therefore to consider these key issues.

The Historic validity for the development of grazing is questionable.

Whilst grazing has been part of the Forest’s history, we do not know its intensity. Was it ever a savannah type open woodland (as is the current concept of ‘wood-pasture’), intensively grazed throughout and, even if it were, is that right for today - questions now being raised in a recent English Nature Research Paper.

The Legality and Nature of Fencing
To enable the entire Forest to be grazed would require over 45 kilometres of fence if just applied to the main roads through the Forest.

The 1878 Act states that the Forest should be kept open and unenclosed for the recreation and enjoyment of the public. The Conservators have always had powers to make enclosures for management purposes and in 1977, the extent was determined as 100 acres at any one time to enable cattle to be excluded so that the enclosed area would recover from over-grazing.

It is clear from this that fencing the entire Forest was never contemplated. To do this, in our view, is against the letter and spirit of the Act.

The nature of the fencing is also critical. Countryside Agency urges land owners and managers not to use electric fencing in areas used by the public (and especially children).

Permanent fencing and electric fences impose limitations on public access both directly and indirectly by intimidation, is visually intrusive and gives the appearance of private ownership and exclusion.

Impacts beyond the Forest - Winter Grazing:

The enormous number of cattle that would be required to graze the whole Forest could not be accommodated on the buffer-land without causing an unacceptable ‘poaching’ problem to the detriment of public access to the buffer-land. Alternative land would need to be found, but where and at what costs?

Costs

The capital and revenue costs of developing grazing throughout the Forest are significant. The provision of both permanent and temporary fences, cattle grids, transportation of animals, costs of contractors tree & scrub clearance, financial contributions to commoners/graziers etc. have recurrent as well as capital cost implications.

Any substantial increases in costs in one area of work usually bring about reductions in other areas – what might these be?

Money spent one way cannot be spent another!

All these questions underscore the need for a measured approach based upon a realistic assessment of the Forest’s and the public’s needs, now and in the foreseeable future.

Landscapes change over time, the needs of the community around the Forest change and wider influences, such as climate change impact upon the Forest. Government is seeking ‘a resilient landscape’ and we need to be sure that the Forest created in 2006 stands the test of time and is not ill conceived and undertaken with too little regard to the Forest’s history, its wildlife, landscape and people.

We most earnestly ask that these matters be given detailed assessment and the most serious consideration.