THE Forestry Commission has been a model of enlightened woodland management under public ownership, encouraging public access, recreation and biodiversity.

It has been able to do this because it balances its remit for timber production with its public responsibilities.

Any government that genuinely wished to improve the quality of life in this country would seek to encourage and extend this sort of stewardship, not destroy it as the present administration seems intent on doing.

The proposed disposal of Forestry Commission woodland is nothing to do with reducing the deficit as the amount of money raised will be derisory in terms of overall national income and expenditure.

Nor has it anything to do with improving the way our woodlands are managed. The Forestry Commission does an excellent job on a budget equivalent to less than 30p per head of the country’s population per year, or less than the price of a packet of crisps.

Rather, the Government’s proposals are motivated entirely by narrow political ideology.

These are our woods, managed for our benefit and for the benefit of those who will come after us. The Government has no moral right to flog them off in some sort of monstrous forestry equivalent of a car boot sale. – Robin Brooks, Barningham, Richmond, North Yorkshire.

I READ Irene Littlejohns’ letter about the proposed sale of our forests (HAS, Jan 29) and could not get to sleep as I thought of the detrimental effect to our heritage should this go through.

Firstly, do you recall the worry some years ago that the Amazon rainforest deforestation was having on the oxygen that could be lost?

Secondly, our forests have been open to the public for hundreds of years.

Thirdly, don’t tell me the companies which would buy pieces of our heritage would not expect to benefit from owning so much timber.

Fourthly, I accept we are financially deeply in the red, but in the longer term will we be financially upset to realise that, like house prices, the forests may well be worth ten times as much as we could gain at today’s prices?

Fifthly, the question arises as to who would pay for staff to supervise the forests, to see the timber is not being quietly siphoned off? They are so dense, a small army would be needed to oversee them.

Regardless of promises, the would-be new owners would return in ten years pleading for a relaxation of the terms originally agreed.

Kings, lords and the nation walked and rode through the forests – they are indeed our heritage.

Keith Wells, Sedgefield, County Durham.