Forres Community Woodlands Trust: How a community regained control of former Common Good Land

Fabio Villani

Introduction

This is a brief account of how the people of Forres, in Morayshire, regained control of former Common Good Land which was sold by the then Town Council in the 1970s. The steering group of the embryonic Muiry Wood Community Woodland Association (MWCWA), which was being set up to manage an existing woodland in partnership with its owners (the Moray Council), discovered that the adjacent, privately owned, felled woodland was being sold by private treaty. Some swift action by the group eventually resulted in the formation of the Forres Community Woodlands Trust (FCWT) and the purchase of some 40 acres of that land. Although we are aware that our initiative is on a very small scale, we hope that the following account will help community groups with similar objectives to learn from our experience and perhaps show policy-makers some of the shortcomings of current support structures and arrangements.

The Background

During the consultation process for the Moray Development Plan in 1998, one man noticed that the Muiry Wood, a much used and loved area of woodland on the outskirts of Forres, was being afforded no protection against unwelcome development. The woodland, belonging to the Moray Council, was the last remnant (32 acres) of a large area which had belonged to the town of Forres until the 1970s. Despite the popularity of the Muiry Wood with walkers and dog-walkers for informal recreation, the Development Plan recognised the woodland only as a commercial woodland. The only protection the plan was going to extend to the Muiry was as Countryside Around Towns (CAT). Given that a very large development contrary to the Local Plan had been pushed through only a few months previously, and given that a large housing development was being proposed nearby at the same time, it is not surprising that some did not believe the protection afforded by the CAT designation to be adequate.

To help the local authority to overcome any eventual temptation to sell off the land as a development opportunity, we proposed the formation of a community group to work in partnership with the Moray Council to allow users and local residents to become actively involved in the management of the woodland. We then sought and received support from the Forres Community Council, the Forres Community Forum Ltd. (a local charitable company) and the local newspaper as well as from members of the community at large. This was achieved mainly through letters, personal contacts, networking, presentations and public meetings.

While these preparations were in progress we discovered that the adjacent woodland was going to be sold to a private buyer. This area of woodland, along with the 32 acres mentioned above, was originally part of a large area of land in mixed use that was managed by the last Town Council of Forres as part of the Forres Common Good Properties. It was sold to a private buyer by the Town Council in 1973, shortly before its dissolution, to avoid any possible asset stripping by the embryonic Grampian Regional Council, based in Aberdeen. The money raised was re-invested within Forres and used to build Forres House Community Centre.

The steering group felt very strongly that the community should be offered the opportunity to regain control of their former property, particularly as the area being sold had remained accessible to, and indeed much used by, the community even after public ownership had ceased. We believed public access could be compromised by a change of ownership, especially if this resulted in a change of use; the prime location of the area, on the edge of the burgh of Forres, made this an easily justifiable concern. A letter was sent to the sellers, putting the case for sale to the community. Once again support was sought and obtained from individuals and community groups as well as from the local councillors and the Forres Gazette. Some preliminary investigations were also carried out regarding possible sources of funding.

Meanwhile, negotiations with the Moray Council were concluded, and the MWCWA was finally constituted and an executive committee duly elected, at the inaugural meeting in September 1999. Barely two weeks afterwards, our approaches to the owners of the neighbouring land were finally rewarded with the offer of 40 acres of that land at the cost of £24,000, subject to the transaction being finalised by the end of 1999, less than three months away. This was a tighter deadline than we would have wished, particularly considering that at that stage our funds amounted to just a few hundred pounds. Moreover, the offer did not include the whole of the area being sold, but it was at least acknowledging the validity of our claim and allowing us to try. We conditionally accepted the offer, subject to confirmation of funding being available.

Preparing and Financing the Bid

Given the tightness of the deadline, the committee decided to concentrate time and resources on seeking grant aid rather than on the slower route of organizing fund-raising events locally. Through our earlier approaches to the Community Land Unit (CLU) of Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE), we knew that our objective fitted very well within their guidelines and that we could put forward a very good case for our project. We were also aware that help was available from the CLU to prepare the bid as well as to raise the funds. We applied for, and were awarded, £2,000 to cover surveyors' and solicitors' fees as well as publicity and administration costs related to the land acquisition.

One of the first stumbling blocks we had to overcome was the legal status of our association. The MWCWA had been set up to work in partnership with the Moray Council to manage that part of the woodland for which the council retained full responsibility. As our role would have been more consultative than executive, the association was constituted as an unincorporated organisation; as such, MWCWA had no legal identity other than as a collection of individuals. One of the implications of this lack of legal identity was that MWCWA could not own property in its own name. Although individuals can hold property on behalf of an unincorporated organisation, this was not going to be a very satisfactory arrangement ... and it certainly wasn't going to satisfy the requirements of the CLU! The Forres Community Forum Ltd. (a community group which was already set up as a limited company) was approached and agreed to buy the land on our behalf if we could source the funds and manage the woodland ourselves.

The committee would have been quite happy with this solution but the CLU and our legal advisor pointed out that, given the broad spectrum of the Forum's activities, the land could have been vulnerable if the Forum ever experienced financial difficulties and had to sell off its assets. The only way forward was to set up a limited company dedicated specifically to the promotion of woodlands for the public benefit. So, within a few weeks of setting up our association (the result of 18 months' work), we were asked to form a new organisation in the form of a limited company. Furthermore, although we were assured that an eventual grant application was going to be looked upon favourably by the CLU board, we were reminded that we could not "assume that assistance with the purchase would be forthcoming".

All this would have been thoroughly demoralising but for the obvious willingness of the CLU to help, and the shared belief that we were in fact quite likely to obtain their support. We were also reassured that if assistance were granted it would consist of a grant of £18,000 and a loan of £5,000 repayable over 12 months, leaving initially only £1,000 to be raised locally before the fast-approaching deadline.

Fortunately the CLU bid-preparation grant allowed us the luxury of legal advice and assistance; thanks to these we were able to adapt and adopt a 'model' constitution and register the new group, the Forres Community Woodlands Trust (FCWT), as a limited company with very similar aims to those of the MWCWA. The two groups were to exist as parallel organisations until a general meeting could be held and the MWCWA dissolved and assimilated within the FCWT, if agreed by the members.

Of course setting up the FCWT was only one of the steps that had to be taken to enable us to purchase the land. Grant application proposals and a management plan had to be written, discussed and modified; financial implications had to be considered and stated; and cash-flow forecasts had to be prepared. Also arrangements had to be made to ensure that, if the CLU assistance was won, the initial community share of the purchase cost could be raised without delay. And of course the correspondence between our solicitor and the sellers had to be checked and commented upon to ensure that important details such as boundaries, access and responsibility for the maintenance of shared fences were clearly set out.

Additionally, the survey and valuation which we had commissioned from Grove Forestry had revealed that a generous Woodland Grant Scheme (WGS) agreement, dating back to 1995, would be transferred along with the land title. This was good news, but the drawback for us was that the planting and regeneration mix did not reflect the actual conditions on the ground and had to be re-negotiated with the Forestry Commission in time for planting to be completed by the end of March 2000.

Most of this work was carried out by unpaid volunteers, with the committee meeting most weeks and daunting amounts of work to be carried out between meetings. However, one by one the jigsaw pieces began to fall into place: the FCWT was registered with Company House, the CLU approved the financial package we requested, the initial contribution from the community was quickly raised and the land finally returned to community ownership on 1st March 2000. The WGS was also satisfactorily re-negotiated and planting was carried out by the end of March deadline, thanks to the combined efforts of volunteer labour and local contractors.

Since the Purchase

The Woodland

The Trust is now involved in the management of three quite different areas. It has developed different primary management objectives for each, reflecting the differences in tenure and in the woods' habitats, although accessibility to the public is a non-negotiable principle of management for all three. The three areas are:

1. The area owned by the Moray Council, where the role of the Trust is more akin to that of an advisory watchdog group than a manager with direct control. This is a fairly mature Scots pine plantation, approximately 75 years old, covering some 13 hectares. A small number of self-sown broadleaves is also present in this area, as well as some invasive exotic species, particularly rhododendrons. A few coupes were felled in this area in spring 1999, which should give us the opportunity to introduce some diversity of both species and age structure in this part of the woodland. This and the control of exotic species within a continuous forestry cover are probably going to constitute the extent of active management in this area.
2. The area to the north-east of the mature pine (just over 10 hectares) is owned and controlled by the FCWT. It was clear-felled by the previous owner in the early 1990s and is at present a good example of lowland heathland at the early stages of colonisation by pine and birch thanks to natural regeneration. The supplementary planting carried out in this area after re-negotiating the WGS with the Forestry Commission was a scattered mix of native broadleaves plus a deep band of Scots pine along the northern boundary. Some 20 per cent of the area is being kept as open ground, both to maintain the visual character of the area and to retain and encourage bio-diversity. This part of the land will be used mainly for informal recreation and as an educational facility. Work planned in this area includes some unobtrusive car parking facilities, path improvements and signage.
3. To the east of this, separated by a minor but busy road, lie a further five hectares, which also belong to the Trust. This area has not been used by the public as much as the previous two, and some of it is more fertile ground with some well established regeneration, mainly birch with small numbers of rowan, holly, larch and Scots pine. The supplementary planting carried out here aims to demonstrate a range of different forestry systems, including a large percentage of native hardwoods, an area of which will be used to demonstrate coppicing, and an area planted with sitka spruce. This site will lend itself to hands-on training sessions in various techniques, from coppicing and green-woodworking to willow-sculpture and small scale harvesting. In the longer term a forest garden may be established here as a working model of permaculture. Improvements to the infrastructure are also planned to facilitate access and interpretation.

The Animateur Scheme

Although elated at the success of our buyout bid, we were now faced, early in 2000, with the challenge of raising £5,000 to repay the loan to the CLU. We were extremely relieved when we learned that the CLU could now help us further with funding to pay a team of animateurs. The term was new to us but it is just another way of referring to a community development agent or team, in this case with the specific remit of co-ordinating fund-raising efforts, raising the profile of the association, increasing public participation, preparing plans for future developments and carrying out other tasks as directed by the Board of Directors. It was unfortunate that such a scheme, or a similar one to fund a project development officer or team, had not been available a few months earlier, when the committee in general, and a couple of members in particular, were running themselves into the ground, as already described. It is a sad but true fact that many worthy community-led initiatives, certainly in Forres and probably elsewhere, are not progressing at the rate they should, mainly due to the lack of support for over-stretched committees manned by over-committed volunteers. Our own project will reach a crossroads in the spring of 2001, when the animateurs' funding runs out. The route we choose will depend on whether or not we are successful in accessing funds for a project development officer or team.

The Animateurs' Work

The team of three animateurs held a preliminary meeting in April 2000 to determine the most efficient way to divide up the tasks identified as priorities by the Board of the FCWT. Following this meeting, one member concentrated on investigating and preparing proposals for infrastructural improvements as the basis for the public consultation planned for the first quarter of 2001. A second member worked initially on planning events and activities, whilst the third concentrated on fund-raising, public relations (PR), administration and event support.

Concrete achievements to date include:

The Future

TheVision

The directors' vision is set out in both the trust constitution and the Draft Management Plan. The former states the aims of the FCWT, restating the original aims of the MWCWA within a broader picture. They are: * "to conserve, regenerate, and promote the restoration of, native woodlands in and around Forres as an important part of Scotland's natural environment for the benefit of the public", and * "to advance the education of the local community and the public about relevant countryside matters."

The draft Management Plan attempts to identify at least some of the practical ways in which we mean to attain our aims within the Muiry Wood: * involving the community in the preparation of the full management plan, "with the emphasis on community participation and involvement rather than speed". (As a first step in this direction the animateurs are currently preparing a draft plan for woodland improvements, including car parks, paths and signage for public consultation during the first quarter of 2001.) * improving the access opportunities through the planned infrastructural improvements * protecting the native elements already present in the woodland and increasing bio-diversity by incorporating a mixture of habitats within the area * providing educational facilities and resources for local schools and youth groups, including leaflets, worksheets, guided tours and presentations.

We also hope that further elements will be added to the vision, as more people become actively involved with the work of the trust. A healthy dynamic tension already seems to be developing within the Board of Directors, with some members interested in concentrating on the Muiry Wood itself whilst others are hoping to use the structure of the trust to encourage community involvement in the management of other local woodlands. In both cases, additional ideas for future developments, ranging from art events to training and employment opportunities, seem to be emerging incessantly. The only constraint we can foresee hampering us is a lack of manpower.

Turning vision into reality

Lack of manpower is probably one of the main challenges facing not-for-profit groups today, whether they are involved in the management of land or not. This is not to belittle the contribution we as volunteers can and do make to community life across Scotland. After all we are community life, but there is a limit to the amount of time and sustained energy volunteers can dedicate to unremunerated activities. Although our land purchase was the result of a purely voluntary effort, raising the funds to repay the CLU loan would have been considerably harder without the help of the team of animateurs. Without their input we certainly would have found maintaining our momentum and increasing our public profile extremely challenging. Furthermore, the public consultation on the proposed infrastructure improvements we are just launching would not be happening for a long time without paid help. The huge potential for community involvement and development will remain largely untapped without unrelenting effort in preparing thoroughly any project or event - a sustained effort that it is unrealistic, and unfair, to expect from unsupported volunteers. It would be in the government interest to ensure that volunteer groups across the land are adequately supported both by external agencies which can supply occasional specialist advice and by funding for paid project development officers. This support would help community groups to fulfil their dual purpose: addressing issues perceived as important by the community and encouraging active citizenship. Some steps, such as the support available through the CLU, have already been taken in the right direction. Let us insist that this kind of support is made available across a wide spectrum of community activities and over a longer term!