There seems to be a silence around the planned changes to the Epping Forest Act. The police pamphlet doesn't mention it. People who only heard about the proposal by means of the pamphlet do not realize that a change to the act is on the agenda. Interesting fact is that we still have not heard about the home office consultation.

Hello all, olympic games monitor

Not sure if anybody here has made links with games monitor but maybe worth a look as they have alot of information that may be relevant to Wanstead Flats

A lot of people around the area may unaware of the proposed law change and think we are against the games themselves, which is not necessarily the case. We have to find away to make this knowledge more widespread. Not everybody is on facebook. A friend of mine who lives on Romford Rd, Forest Gate knew nothing of the proposals or the campaign till I told her. We have to find a way of raising the profile without resorting to smear campaigns and underhand tactics.

I live near Cann Hall Road, but am happy to be part of a planned flyering campaign further afield - I just don't want to be turning up on streets that have already been 'done'.

Does anyone know where I can download the Epping Forest Act of 1878. I have been calling around and no one wants me to see it.

I may just have to go to the Guildhall Complex in the 'City' and demand to see it.

The Epping Forest Act 1878 is, so far as I can gather, NOT available online.

Indeed, a question in the Commons in 1975 revealed that there was a shortage of printed copies
and no more were planned. I have made a request on an appropriate Government website that
the Act be digitised, offering to proof read it.

I got a copy yesterday from Kevin. I'll try and get it scanned and shared on my server soon.

I don't know if its important , but i was reading the consultation document on the planned change, and a lot of the wording is incorect. they refer to the 2010 games on page 13 fianl paragraph of " fair Balance " section.

could this be the bit that sees the document scrapped as incorrect.