THE NEW FOREST: A SKETCH – FROM THE “FORTNIGHTLY REVIEW” OF APRIL 1, 1871 [Reprinted by Permission]

Author: GE Briscoe Eyre

Description: The author deplores how the 'English' tended to ignore the aesthetic beauty and economic value of the countryside around them. The New Forest had largely gone unnoticed and left to the "tender mercies" of the Department of Woods which from 1848-68 had cleared old oak and beech woods, enclosed and planted Scotch fir, dug ditches, created banks and put up fences; thus, obliterating the natural beauty of whole districts with its uniformity of planting. Although the damage is irreparable the author claims it is not too late to save what is left. The author goes on to "sketch ... the salient features of the [New Forest's] scenery and to trace the causes and progress of the changes ... in its appearance". He delineates the boundaries, describes its area, elevation, vegetation, soil, terrain, mineral content, silviculture, natural beauty and mammals. He goes on to quantify the damage done by replanting, ditching or "vandalism" causing hard outlines cf. "soft irregularity of nature". He deals with the old woods in depth and in lyrical fashion but also looks at the history of their development, the survey of 1608 which identified "old and valuable timber", the introduction of "artificial timber" (in 1698), the links with the Naval dockyards at Portsmouth, the development of plantations, possible loss of pasturage for commoning, the reduction of the value of timber in the 19th century. He compares woodland management up to 1851 adversely with the 'current day' planting of Scotch timber where formerly old woods had stood and how the Act of 1851 whilst preserving the 'language, reversed the intention of the Act of 1698'whereby a limited number of oak were planted for Naval use, the rate of enclosure was limited to 200 acres per year and special clauses safeguarded commoners rights - but the author notes that the planned planting exceeded the original estimate and the value of timber had decreased. The plantations made just prior to 1851 and since, swept away the native woodland, ornamental woods had fed the timber market, grassy valleys and lawns disappeared beneath Scotch fir, the land intersected by indelible trenches and new rides laid out on 'no intelligible principle of convenience or picturesqueness'. The radical change caused by the Deer Removal Act of 1851 meant, in the author's view, a loss to the nation as a whole; whilst the Sovereign's interest in the deer had lapsed, their value to the landscape had been immense. The author is lyrical about keepers' feeding of the deer but acknowledges the temptations they offered locals for poaching, the damage they wrought for farmers and to commoning pastures and the cost of feed to the Crown. A Select Committee in 1848-9 did little to change matters, although the Office of Woods marked out 'best' blocks of land for planting; the Commissioner's subsequent Deer Removal Act introduced the new principle 'of planting for profit only'. The author claims that opposition to the Act and subsequent negotiation was 'involved in much mystery'. It became evident that the clause protecting common rights was inoperable due to the choice of the best pasture land for planting and by 1867 a continuous green belt had formed in the densely populated east Forest. The results of a Committee of Inquiry granted in 1868 showed that a conflict of interest existed: planting could only occur on land 'best spared from the commons' vs. 'a power to confiscate all the pasturable land'. Evidence was brought forward that the removal of the deer had reduced the number of species required to give value to pastures and their extent. Enforcement of Winter Heyning was threatened. Without Parliamentary intervention the author envisaged 'its [the Forest's] whole area converted into a monotonous nursery of timber'. The Committee advised 'the immediate partition of the forest between the Crown and the commoners where the 'rights of the latter should be "equitably" estimated'. The author's closing remarks concentrate on the needs of the public and the management of the forest to 'preserve the open lands and native beauty', viz., 'the condition and peril of the old woods and of the most picturesque portion of the woodland': e.g. 4,000 of 9,000 acres of natural self-sown forest existing in 1849 had been cleared beetween 1851 and 1869 and the ancient wood sold to pay for the new plantations. Despite the recommendatons of the 1868 Committee and an assurance that nothing would be done during the Parliamentary recess in early autumn 1870 local commissioners were asked 'to set out "5,000 acres for plantation, including almost all the old woods". The Commission refused to include the woods but authorised planting of 2,500 acres. The author calls for immediate action envisaging that if any doubts as to the interpretation of the Acts were removed the Commissioners would find the claims of the Office of Woods irrestistible. The open spaces were also in danger; 11,500 acres having been enclosed over an 18 year period. Partitioning the forest (recommended by the 1868 Committee) was not the answer as the Office of woods could claim compensation under the Acts resulting in further planting or fees. Only two forestal rights had made it onto the Statute Book: Fence Month and Winter Heyning these rights were forfeit under the 1851 Act and compensation was demanded - these claims were largely unsatisfied and further compensation would be required. The author had written his Sketch because of the 'Bill for the disafforestation of the New Forest to be brought before Parliament ... by the Commissioner of Woods and Forests'. The author hopes a 'searching enquiry' will occur before the forest is 'permitted to pass into the hands of any section of the nation' and be lost to the nation as a whole.

Publisher: Reprinted by Permission from the "Fortnightly Review" of April 1, 1871.

Period covered: 1871

Format: Pamphlet: Printed on paper

Primary Reference: 300000009

Last import: December 21, 2022