[Closed] Macc Forest Closed, please spread the word as a few continue to ignore the signs

Really you can’t just close footpaths and bridleways beasuse your a utility company or can’t clear trees quickly get on to the local council. Don’t let them piss you about or they will never reopen.

health and safety my arse

Really you can’t just close footpaths and bridleways beasuse your a utility company or can’t clear trees quickly get on to the local council. Don’t let them piss you about or they will never reopen.

health and safety my arse

you can close footpaths and bridalways if you own the land, they could make it private and close off all access.

is it REALLY that hard to just stay away for a while.

Who's getting married now? In the forest? They've asked people to stay away for the moment!

you can close footpaths and bridalways if you own the land, they could make it private and close off all access.

Actually, if they're public rights of way, you really can't. (Well, not without a lot of hassle for temporary closure, and an order of magnitude more for a permanent diversion).

This is a polite request which I believe we should adhere to.

Macc forest is a place I've been walking and mtbing in for decades. Lets not get ourselves a bad name. Many people aren't keen on mtbikers as it is, let's show everyone we are mature, responsible users of the countryside.

Hopefully the forest and surrounding area will be open again before the summer.

Maybe the op should fit stabilisers to his mike to make it a bit safer.

be community spirited and get free logs

A quick glance at the OS map suggests that there are no bridleways and only a couple of footpaths in the forest (plus the roads of course). The authorities are probably well within their rights to shut general access to the larger network of unofficial routes that people probably use most of the time.

Of course when access is lost permanently (not just bridleways in Macc Forest but some specific MTB tracks allowed by good will) those who currently bleat about ignoring the current request to stay out will continue riding there anyway.

From those who have local knowledge I understand:

There are a lot of trees down - some in large groups which are hard to clear, and some deeper in the forest are still dangerous.

Not all the forest is shut, however most of the circular routes are blocked

UU appear to have put more effort into very substantial fencing and signage than actually removing any trees

It is a polite request, but the logic is flawed...folk who ignore the signs do so at their own risk, and there is no forest operation ongoing to avoid!

The lack of any tree clearing in 2 weeks is really building up frustration in the local community, the dog walker, the ramblers etc etc.. all the other parks, public spaces etc were clear of dangerous trees on the main pathways within a couple of days...this is standing out like a sore thumb...some of the blocked paths have only a single tree to clear.

I'd suggest some journalistic interrogation of UU to help them focus on getting it sorted!

I am so glad I live in Scotland.  to me this is just an excuse to use to stop people going on the land at all.  I bet it is never reopened.

I am so glad I live in Scotland.  to me this is just an excuse to use to stop people going on the land at all.  I bet it is never reopened.

I bet it is.

We will see but to me this smacks of an excuse to close off the land.  there is no reason at all that access cannot be continued right now.  We don't close off whole chunks of land if a few trees are down - indeed in Scotland you cannot do so

To be fair, 2 weeks doesn't sound long to clear trees that have fallen across trails safely, having seen some of my local trails after high winds.

Being in Scotland, the landowner can't stop me accessing it, but my lack of chainsaw and a free weekend or two to clear trees and reinstate the trail means there are trails I can't ride - and you can't get a bike through, probably can't even get through on foot. And, not being a right of way, nobody has an obligation to clear the trails.

That said, if they're fencing things off it does sound like they'd be better clearing the trees and putting up signs only.

Throughout the works, the Commission will be working hard to minimise disruption to biking and walking trails but temporary trail closures will need to be put in place around felling locations.

Hmmm! Seems you can close trails in Scotland

Why cant people be responsible for themselves, a tree could fall on our heads anytime we ride in the woods.  Falling trees is just real life, why cant people deal with that.  Why does a company feel obliged to close the woods for something that's bloody obvious.

Sure, if they are driving about with big machines the stick up some warning signs.  Saying the woods are shut because some trees fell down in a storm seems daft.

Danebower hollow and Cumberland clough are bridleways and don't form part of the Forest tracks so they should be okay. However my usual loop will be affected but not greatly, can just have to extend it further south to Gradbach and 3 shires or north to the Goyt. There's still plenty of options in the area.

Sure, if they are driving about with big machines the stick up some warning signs. Saying the woods are shut because some trees fell down in a storm seems daft.

They’re cutting the trees to clear the trail.

Why cant people be responsible for themselves, a tree could fall on our heads anytime we ride in the woods. Falling trees is just real life, why cant people deal with that.

Roughly 6 fatalities per year and around 55 A&E visits per year attributable to being struck by trees or part of in the U.K.  I don't think it's an issue (when the road to the forest is probably the most hazardous part of the trip).

Roughly 6 fatalities per year and around 55 A&E visits per year attributable to being struck by trees or part of in the U.K.

That's not the entire point though is it.  U-U's point is that the odds of being hit by any individual tree are very slim as you say (so their risk assessment allows access to the forest),  The odds of unstable or partially fallen trees collapsing on someone are presumably much higher. The odds of some have-a-go-hero killing themselves with a Lidi chainsaw clearing trails themselves probably even higher.

It's the difference between the risk you accept (unlikely event of a falling tree or branch in normal conditions) and the risk of an incident with a tree they know is unsafe is where the problem lies.

It's analogous as you say to driving a car to the forest, you accept that risk, however the car manufacturer has an obligation to do a recall if they find a safety issue with the cars which increases that risk beyond what you accept.

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">Danebower hollow and Cumberland Clough are bridleways and don’t form part of the Forest tracks so they should be okay. However my usual loop will be affected but not greatly, can just have to extend it further south to Gradbach and 3 shires or north to the Goyt. There’s still plenty of options in the area.

You can also get up to Charity (which isn't affected) via Hacked Way, then Bottom of the Ovens, Cat & Fiddle, Danebower, Cumberland and back to Standing Stone car park. From here its either road back to The Smithy or head up Charity and descend Hacked Way.

There is still stuff to ride without going into the Forest, but personally as Oscillate Wildly has said in another thread... its just not worth the effort to ride in the Forest, its F.......d!! . There is no fun in wrestling you and your bike round fallen trees, that have the potential to fall without warning, due to already being uprooted and somehow just lodged but ready to let go at any second

My 2p's worth

i must admit, I was a little baffled by it seeing it in person, it does appear they have made more effort to put up blockades and fences, than to actually remove the trees strewn across the footpaths that people use

now to put it into context, it is a working forest, there were trees being felled/cleared by the bucket load all of the last year, totally removing one part of the forest from trees

so access for machinary to remove these trees is not an issue at all, nor is getting the machinery to cut/chop the same said trees

so I cant help but think there is a little more to it tbh, when Ive mentioned before the woods are ****ed in the other thread, yes they are, but those woods have no footpaths in them at all to cause a health and safety alert for walkers.....the main forest paths, which is what all the dog shitting prick walkers use (to let there dogs shit and not clear up RANT OVER) could be cleared by a machine in a day I'm sure, given the machinery ive seen been used in there just last year

instead they've just literally shut it down, without even attempting to remove the trees, it is a little odd, that said its only 2 weeks ago, so who knows! fingers crossed they sort it out, ill be avoiding it really, as until they clear just the main paths you cant really get to anything good anwyays

Which one's 'hacked way' Carlos?
Is it that horrible tarmacced hill from the gate leading off to the right and meets charity sorta halfway down.
So we can't go through the gate and up to charity through the forest + past the 'walkers barn' track any longer? for the moment.
The tracks around Castleton are looking more appealing every minute, despite the drive.

Hi, I wanted to run up Shutlingsloe this morning but decided not to chance it, is the main path closed at the Standing Stone or is it blocked further round?

Why cant people be responsible for themselves, a tree could fall on our heads anytime we ride in the woods.  Falling trees is just real life, why cant people deal with that.  Why does a company feel obliged to close the woods for something that’s bloody obvious.

because if people get injured the first thing lots will do is go to injury lawyers for cash and get a claim in against the land owner for not preventing them from their own actions. so much "elf n safety gawn mad" is actually from insurance to minimize the cost of litigation as the great British public on the whole are utter tits that will not accept liability for their own actions which may lead to an accident

instead they’ve just literally shut it down, without even attempting to remove the trees, it is a little odd,

I'm guessing the forestry machines have been more than a little busy though, there's probably a whole long list of stuff that get's cleared as a priority (roads, power/phone lines, rights of way) before they start work clearing "Bez knows Best* " Strava segments.

*may not actually exist, but it should, just to the side of some really good trails, and have a tamborine.

Drac - in a working forest to allow heavy machinery in.  You cannot simply lay a blanket ban on access indefinitely in Scotland - simply there is no power to do so.  so if this was Scotland they would close parts of it while actually working

Jekkyl - The climb starts at the very bottom on Holehouse Lane, goes between the reservoirs, under Teggs Nose, then up Forest Road. its a loose stoney climb that then leads onto the tarmac you're on about.

Don't know about the forest track up to the stone barn

Carlos - yo! sorry didn't see your post before I posted that lol

yep as carlos says, you can still do charity via hacked way and still make it a good loop onto goyt/gradbach or where ever really, just be aware you wont be going back to the car through the forest, as its a) pointless trying to get around the trees and b) they properly closed it off now

but you can still use the road to get back to the car via standing stone so its not a complete write off if you still enjoy doing charity etc (which most non locals will come and do that anyways)

ive just been informed that united utilities don't actually look after the forestry side of it, its done by the forestry commission, so maybe answers why united utilities couldn't really care nor have any interest in reopening it asap

its sad though, lots of us for years have been saying it needs to properly managed, its crying out for some proper designated trails in the woods, I'm sure lots of people would volunteer and help fund it, it has everything there on a plate (steepness, woods etc etc) to build some excellent long lasting trails, but nobody is interested in it at all 🙁

I know of a few lads that have gone up armed with saws etc trying to clear some, but its a losing battle, it needs machinery to move it, they are big buggers that have come down, when you stand next to them, you realise just how bad that storm was last week, the roots they have upheaved is insane

on the plus side least the parking has got better since this happened, I don't rarely ride there on a weekend (unless its a quick hungover blast) as its just rammed with walkers letting there dogs crap everywhere (again rant!) so its not really worth heading up at all on a weekend for me, but its been eerily quiet along side the res the last few weeks at night 🙁

its a sorry state that's all I can say, and most of the lower off piste stuff is really really ****ed 🙁

ref the paths upto charity or via the lower path they are both strewn with trees, the one up to the stone cottage (directly upto charity) isn't as bad as the other side (upto the viewpoint), you can get around it, and it would take all of 30 mins to remove the trees blocking the path upto the stone cottage (this is why its a little odd to me) BUT they have now put a brand new fence /gate just before the stone cottage to stop you going into the forest

the other side (black rabbit side) is far far far worse, its almost impassable tbh, will require more work but still nothing a working forest cant clear relatively quickly!

makes you wonder if they've been waiting for this to happen to shut it down #melodramatic (hopefully not reading too much into it)

I don't know the area, so I might be missing something here, I'm confused that some are pointing out that the trails aren't rights of way and others are intimating that the closure is an "excuse" and they don't want to re-open them...

surely if they aren't rights of way then they don't need an excuse if they want them closed, they just close them, no?

There are a couple of public footpaths but mostly it's concessionary footpaths and bridleways.

hmmm it does seem a bit odd. Cannock got the snow worse in the deluge 2 weeks ago and they're still open, and my local woods at Hanchurch were large unaffected.
We'll watch this space!

edlong - the forest itself has only a few 'legitimate' trails, charity lane is pretty much well known far and wide throughout the mtb community and most routes you would see for the forest published will pretty much only include charity lane and bottom of the oven (I'm not actually sure if these are classed as being owned by UU tbh)

the forest paths are multi use (mtb/walkers/horses) but they don't offer anything good at all, they are literally just wide bridleways

however, there is a hell of a lot of off piste stuff all over, which again isn't footpaths nor anything at all on a map, just what people ride, UU seem to turn a blind eye to it (for most part) (these trails are not used by walkers at all)

so although us mtbers really have been affected, the most common user, walkers, have been completely screwed as the main paths could be cleared very quickly and be used again, but they are not, and haven't been touched since its happened, its a little bit odd is all I can think but hopefully its just a slow process (for what ever reason!) to get them cleared

"Perhaps the most difficult and dangerous trees to cut are ones that have been damaged by storms."

It seems like clearing storm-fallen trees is considerably harder and more dangerous than regular forestry operations. The Pennel's Vennel trail at Glentress suffered a similar problem after a gale a few years ago. There were similar questions asked about why the FC didn't just clear it up and get it open again quickly. Eventually another trail was built to replace it, as that was cheaper and safer than trying to untangle the mess of fallen trees safely.

My question was directed at comments like this

I’d suggest some journalistic interrogation of UU to help them focus on getting it sorted!

and

 We will see but to me this smacks of an excuse to close off the land. 

If they aren't (generally) public rights of way, why would they need an "excuse?" - couldn't they just close it off because they wanted to?

TJ you're talking bollocks - Exemptions to the LRA are granted for health and safety reasons so felling operations would fall in that but there could also be a case for large scale damage as the result of severe storm events - even sporting events can get them. There will be a time frame attached but that's not to say that can't be reviewed and extended.

So legally there is a power to stop people accessing land and in terms of large scale storm damage and associated clearance you could have blanket restrictions over large geographical areas (i.e. a forest).

Anyway back to the topic at hand and not the world according to TJ;

In the UK landowners have a duty of care to people on their land (legally or illegally) under the Occupiers' Liability Act.

If the land owner is aware of something that poses a risk - large numbers of unstable tree's, hanging branches, and restricted vehicle access for things like emergency services; sound familiar? - they are obligated to take action to make it safe - closing the forest and informing people is the first step, then there's a large amount of work to do (which won't of been factored in to any ones work plans) before finally getting contractors on site to deal with it.

Trained and equipped harvesting teams aren't just sat around waiting for trees to fall down in the 'working forest'. The lead in time for forest operations is anywhere from 6 months to 2 years to get all the required licenses, tenders / timber sales, health and safety documentation, maps and plans, and surveys etc.

It's pretty simple: do what the land owner has asked so they can get on with it, and pack it in with the knee jerk reactions based of your own ill-informed opinions and what can and can't be done.

Wind blown trees are pretty dangerous to clear as they are often under tension in awkward directions so when cut they move around in unexpected ways and at great speed. I certainly wouldn't want to be near one when that's being done.

Also if a wind blown tree is caught up in another and there's further wind it could be dislodged and spring back seemingly of it's own accord. Think of wind blown areas as being littered with very large mouse traps, not somewhere you want the public wandering willy nilly.

I am not talking bollox - its the truth.  When glentress was badly damaged by windblown trees it was not a blanket closure for weeks with no work done.  It was small areas at a time and diversions were put in place.  YOu simply cannot close large areas of land to access for indefinite periods under LRA as you state yourself.

I will bet this land is never reopened to public access - as others have said fences are being put up in places.

I’m assuming that White Rabbit is ruined then. It’s a great little blast through the woods. Dropping under Teggs Nose and coming up Hacked Way to Charity is a hideous climb. Better to go past Hacked Way and climb the tarmac bit of Charity Lane. Going down Hacked Way is fun though.

This seems like a classic case of needing to ask yourselves “do I trust this landowner?”

Are they just using it as an excuse to close/block trails, put up fences and **** everyone off?

Or are they genuinely cracking on with work that they are more confident doing if they know no one is going to ride under a half felled tree they are working on?

Unfortunately in England i suspect that most landowners fall into the former category.

Give it a month. If nothing happens, ask the landowner what they are doing and when. If they then don’t stick to it, then it is pretty obvious they’re not going to do anything positive, so you might as well crack on.

Could it be that nothing's been done because all the FC crews and contractors are busy with all the other trees that got blown down?

I wouldn't get too conspiracy theory about it yet, but is there a local MTB group which could make a formal approach to UU?

funk - yep pretty much all of that area from what ive seen has been hit the worse, white rabbit (although its higher up) wasn't as bad as black rabbit, black rabbit was completely ****ed, white rabbit still looked semi ok, but I didn't go in and I cant imagine its avoided not getting hit at all

hacked way to charity is pretty hideous, you can go around the road way (to avoid hacked way) and join back up to the top of charity, still a painful climb, but no where near as bad as the hacked way climb

I guess it just comes down to liability on UU part, the stuff in the woods isn't really a concern of theres as such as its not suppose to be ridden anyways, although I'm gutted I hope it will manage to reopen and new trails get sorted

but I can only advise that it really isn't worth going into at the min anyways, if your desperate to do charity, then that's still accessible anwyays with no trees in sight (just rock hard snow drifts, but hopefully cleared now)

chakaping - yep I agree, I honestly didn't know FC took control of the tree/forestry side of it, just thought it was all privately managed to UU

it makes more sense now I guess knowing that, they probably need all sorts of forms/signatures etc etc to get permission to access and clear it, plus as you say a back log from other hit areas

but we have had lots of trees down in the past, not as bad as this, but some have defo been across the footpaths before and its never as far as I'm aware been closed before

fingers crossed something good comes from it for everyone in time

You simply cannot close large areas of land to access for indefinite periods under LRA as you state yourself.

There will be a time frame attached but that’s not to say that can’t be reviewed and extended.

I've quoted my post in bold for you - do you need it in bigger text as well?

Is it thick as shit Friday and no one told me?

(1)The local authority may (whether on application made to them or not) by order under this section made in respect of a particular area of land specified in the order exempt it for a particular purpose specified in the order from the access rights which would otherwise be exercisable in respect of it during such times as may be specified in the order.

Section 11 if you're struggling to read that as well.

Sorry for a slight derail - misinformation need's correcting.

Yes - and that bit in bold is not in line with the rest of what you say nor is it in line with what has happened here.  Here the landowner has simply closed access indefinitely without having to show it was needed.  that cannot happen in Scotland

I say it again .  In Scotland this could not happen.  That is the truth of the matter.  Land owners cannot close off access on a whim, they cannot close of access for indefinite periods.

Its very different when you have to apply to the local authority for the closure and have to justify the closure presumption being that access remains at all times.

Its you that has missed my point completely.   But you seem to want to berate me for something I have not said.

I've cut alot of windblown trees from local trails, the big ones have alot of power in them, easily enough to kill you if you're in the wrong place. The top is trying to fall over, the roots trying to pull it all back up.

TJ, what's the point in arguing, it's not in Scotland!

This seems like a classic case of needing to ask yourselves “do I trust this landowner?”

United Utilities own huge tracts of land which have concessionary public access - largely reservoir catchments. I can't see them having any particular desire to cease public access to macc forest in the long term.

I would imagine the perceived hazard are the trees currently teetering on the brink. Those which have already fallen are not the ones most likely to fall on your head. I would imagine UU's legal department are all over this like a rash.

Latest news from Keeper of the Peak (after phone conversation with the Woodland Officer)

https://kofthep.com/2018/03/16/macclesfield-forest-whats-going-on/

 Are they just using it as an excuse to close/block trails, put up fences and **** everyone off?

Sorry, I do realise that I sound like a stuck record, but I keep seeing comments like this^, and we seem to established that the trails, by and large, aren't public rights of way, so can someone (anyone?) join the dots for me on this - if this is private land, not in Scotland, and the trails aren't ROWs, why would UU need an "excuse" if they wanted to close them down?

What was stopping them from fencing it all off before the storms, if that was what they wanted?

If some people have a shouty argument in a forest, do they make any sound?

cheers alexsimon, that is reassuring!

I guess panic stations were setting in as we've not experienced this before, glad to hear its going to be restored, I wonder if they mind shifting the trees in all the off piste whilst they are at it 😉

good news, guess its just going to take time (couldn't have happened at the start of winter, could it?! thank you final kick in the teeth of winter you cruel mistress 🙁 )

But money on it there will be a forest holiday village there by the time it reopens

i live east northants we had the snow and wind and lots of trees down in the woods 2 days all the rights of way were cleared

the rest was too wet to get on

Sorry, I do realise that I sound like a stuck record, but I keep seeing comments like this

So sorry. It was, in fact, a genuine question. You will note my use of a question mark to denote this.

Just a tip, if you go around looking to be offended, you will be offended.

Lighten up, buttercup.

if your desperate to do charity, then that’s still accessible anwyays with no trees in sight (just rock hard snow drifts, but hopefully cleared now)

The snow lingers for eternity down Charity. I’ll have to have a walk up and check out the damage from the permissible routes. I live on the road that leads up to the forest, but haven’t ridden there in a while. No MTB and a five month old 😕 sees to that.

I’d be gutted if they stopped access permanently. There is some great riding in and around that area. One of the reasons I agreed to buy the house we’re in. Mrs F loved it and decent riding on the doorstep swing it for me.

UU/FC have to get the machinery in to clear the fallen trees, this is not something they can do overnight. Its not really a working forest, the intensive felling over the last few years was the result of a survey that bought to the attention of UU/FC the poor state of the forest and the problems faced unless they felled trees intensively and relatively quickly.

Some selfish people here.

1. Its there so stop whinging, you have no right to be there except under sufferance or consideration.

Now that's the real answer.

2. A more sociable one is that the could be liable if a tree drops on your head and some lawyer has said so. That is more important than some one who wants a walk to them. I assume that we all know that the law may be an ass at times but a large company cannot negotiate with each individual who wants to play can they?

3. Why complain about 2 weeks? Its nothing. It might take that to get a contractor in. Many are busy now, their contracted one might be tied up and not able to do a big job and putting it out to tender isn't likely at short notice. Also its not in their interest to do so is it. For a start, it could damn well snow again. Better to wait until spring is properly here and do it once.

Maybe try and pretend its coming out of your pocket and be reasonable about it rather than come across as a bunch of selfish types who show no respect. Sadly that's what has to happen.

<div class="bbp-reply-author">AlexSimon
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Subscriber</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">

Latest news from Keeper of the Peak (after phone conversation with the Woodland Officer)

</div>

<div class="bbp-reply-content">

Macclesfield Forest – what’s going on?

</div>

Thanks, Alex and KOTP for bringing some sense to this discussion.  Macc Forest is major leisure hub for walkers, runners, horseriders as well as Mountain bikers.  Apart from one section that's about 1km long and the downhill course, there are no official dedicated mountain bike routes 95% of folks cycle on the shared paths and bridleways.  There is no way that UU is going to close those paths and anyone that lives or uses the area would understand that.   But i suppose they could be more proactive in taking out the unofficial trails or closing the downhill track, if it is seen that MTB's are ignoring the closures.

The Forest has been decimated and as someone who spends a significant proportion of my leisure time in the forest it's not great, but it's not as if it the rest of the Peak District has nowhere else to mountain bike or run in is it, whilst they sort it out.

Knowing the state the unofficial trails get in in winter, a few months with people not trashing them should leave them in a better state come summer.

The climb up hacked way to Charity lane is ok. Not easy but good training and more interesting than the section that’s closed off.

”There is no way that UU is going to close those paths and anyone that lives or uses the area would understand that”

There is every chance this could happen. I know it’s a consideration and know plenty rangers and people with a idea what’s happening. Anyone with a ear to the ground understands. The deer are a problem and they cannot have a proper deer cull as they cannot be sure the areas are clear to shoot. People are just roaming where they want. It’s private land, most people don’t seem to grasp this.

Update in the local paper today... 6,000 mature trees uprooted and damaged, but they’re starting to reopen parts of the forest.

https://www.macclesfield-express.co.uk/news/local-news/parts-macclesfield-forest-reopened-time-14465617

update for everyone

the footpaths have been closed with the councils permission as dangerous(yes they can close them reading comments above)

12000 trees are down and more ready to fall, Contractors have had to be used as UU dont have their own way to remove trees. progress is slow as langley village restricts lorry sizes moving trees off site.

pine trees are not deep rooted so unstable ground made it dangerous. so mtb track/bridgeways are dangerous due to trees being uprooting, making ground below unstable, so track unstable

parts of forest have been opened. these are mostly foot paths, not the mtb and bridgeways.

they are concentrating on one area at a time.

tracks above leather smithy(below charity lane are closed even though idiots ignore the signs and climb over the gate which rangers and police aware of)

UU control alot of our forests including teh one on Country File on sunday in Cumbria, and although we all benefit from these nice mtb routes, we have to remember its private land, not public and we have no right to be their, unless they allow it(just like them riding in your garden)

they are working hard to sort it, but im told some routes might be shut for months not weeks, as too many trees affected

just like them riding in your garden

No, not really like them riding in my garden at all. My garden closely surrounds my private residence. UU land generally speaking used to belong to the public until the Tories privatised the water boards, and is rarely near any residence.

No, not really like them riding in my garden at all. My garden closely surrounds my private residence. UU land generally speaking used to belong to the public until the Tories privatised the water boards, and is rarely near any residence.

That’s the wrong answer. You’re supposed to doff  your cap and accept that private companies own the land and can restrict access ‘for your safety’.

Anyway, 12,000 trees fallen? Even taking into account that it’s a mature plantation that sounds a lot but probably isn’t. (It’s about 5% of my local planted woodland.) If true, why weren’t UU actively managing the place to prevent that amount of damage? Winter storms are hardly an unusual occurrence.

(My thought process here is that if anyone was going to be hurt by a tree it would likely be during the storm, less likely afterwards. Is it cheaper/better to close a forest and manage it later or to realise that many of these trees were reaching a point that they’d fall during any high wind so needed to be managed prior to falling? Or are we getting to the point that UU will close any mature forest in the run up to any winter storm in case someone is hurt.)