The forest debate in Sweden is as intense as it is old. This thesis aims to explore similarities and differences in how private land owners and environmentalists in Sweden describe their relationship to the forest. Earlier research is mainly focused on the argumentative aspect of the forest debate, whereas I analyze how the relationship between people and forests is being expressed, in order to understand why people take a certain standpoint in the debate. It builds on a premise that private land owners and environmentalists often are framed as enemies in the public forest debate, while my hypothesis is that there is actually a lot of common ground between them. The purpose of this thesis is to find areas where the debate can take on a more nuanced tone by revealing common traits and complexities regarding peoples relationship with the forest.  Using Kenneth Burkes dramatistic pentad the material is being analysed to find the worldview and values that functions as motives for the actions taking place in relation to the forest. The material is written and recorded stories from private land owners as well as environmentalist.   The theoretical framework is Environmental Rhetorics with a focus on the ongoing discussion about ecocentrism and antropocentrism in the humanities, Place based studies, and Invitational Rhetoric along with Rhetorical Listening.   The thesis answer the question of what similarities and differences can be found between how private land owners and environmentalist in Sweden express their relationship to the forest. The result reveals what these answers mean for the public forest debate in Sweden, and suggests some opportunities on how to make the forest debate more nuanced.