This paper explores the historical transformations initiated by the first five Iranian Constitutional Parliament (1906-1926) in forest management. The overarching goal is to delve into how legislative changes, specifically alterations in land divisions, taxation policies, and regulatory efforts, were employed to exert greater control over forests. The argument unfolds as we explore the complexities of implementing these reforms and the challenges faced, ranging from corruption in tax collection to the lack of personnel for regulation enforcement. Established in 1906, the Iranian Constitutional Parliament (Majlis) reviewed existing laws and regulations rooted in tradition or religious laws. While forest protection was not the primary focus of the Parliament, it intermittently addressed the issue and endeavored to establish more systematic regulations over time. The Qajar shahs had previously limited forest exploitation, prompting the Majlis to seek a more systematic approach to address these issues. Established at the time of Naser al-Din Shah Qajar, the Department of Trade underwent reorganization, becoming the Ministry of Public Benefits (Vizarat-i Favayid-i ‘Ammih) with dedicated departments, including the Department of Forests, Edifices, and Gardens. The constitutional parliament redefined land divisions with two major changes: first, converting crown land (khalisa) to state land (dowlati), and second, abolishing land renting (tuyul). However, the new rules still granted rights to individual owners, with lands called Arbabi (lordship lands), allowing them to benefit from their forests as long as they paid 10% taxes to the government. In 1926, attempts were made to recognize forests as government property while allowing individuals ownership of smaller arbor areas. However, forest control proved challenging due to market demands and the population’s reliance on charcoal for household fuels. Other attempts for forest protection included collaboration with German experts for forestry and efforts to prevent fires by curbing risky behaviors around forests. However, these regulations faced challenges in implementation. Reports of corruption within the system were rampant, with tax collectors overcharging owners or manipulating land classifications to evade taxes. The enforcement of regulations also suffered due to a lack of personnel, with guards facing perilous encounters with charcoal and log smugglers. This paper employs an array of primary and secondary sources but mostly focuses on parliamentary discourses. The paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the legislative landscape and its practical implications during the early twentieth century.