woods and forest

[kujawski]

whats the difference between a wood and a forest, if size, then what size defines a forest.

[Quizmonster]

The difference between a wood and a forest is rather like the difference between a sea and an ocean. Basically, in both cases, it is generally a question of size, as you suggest.
Chambers Dictionary...wood = a collection of more or less densely growing trees; a stretch of country supporting such growth.
forest = a large uncultivated tract of land covered with trees and undergrowth.
The only apparent difference is one of size, if you consider the words in those definitions.
In Britain, the agency known as the Forestry Commission has multi-thousands of acres of deliberately planted trees. On the other hand, nature programmes on TV are constantly showing us life in the tropical rainforests, which were certainly not deliberately planted!
It would seem, therefore, that a forest can be either natural or man-made. I'm not so sure whether a wood can be either. Having said that, I'd imagine that some of the great country houses had woods deliberately created around them in past times.

[heathfield]

In the UK, forest was the term used for an area set aside for hunting, and could and did include tree-less heathland.
Under the Kyoto agreement, forests have had to be re-defined worldwide, and even areas of Arctic tundra have been included in the definition.
But the Australian Forestry definition provides for '20 percent crown cover' of the land on which trees are growing.
You takes your pick!

[spudqueen]

As heathfield says not all forest were covered in trees, eg Bowland Forest

[Quizmonster]

The word 'forest' actually comes from the medi�val Latin phrase "forest-em silvam", meaning "the outside wood"...ie the woodland outside private parkland. It originally referred, therefore, to terrain largely covered by trees, whether used for royal hunting or not.