So sorry for the late reply! Got a newborn over here and time gets away from me...clearly. So on a lot of the census records I've seen, it looks like East Dean comes up the most. Based on what you're telling me (I think I'm understanding), these were more rural areas that weren't always incorporated into a township so they created two large areas of land West vs East. One census record I saw (I believe it was 1881) mentioned Ashton Bridge road as an address which looks like modern day Ruardean? Is Ruardean part of what was known as "East Dean"? I know I've had family reference Ruardean, Littledean and Mitcheldean. Oddly enough, a few years prior to the 1881 census, it looked like at least my great-great grandfathers older brothers were born in Whitecroft.. which would be West Dean and a good amount south based on maps and what not. I've read up as much as I can about the Forest, and it definitely seemed like colliers in particular (which my family was) tended to follow the work. Was it common for people to move so frequently across the Forest? Is it a bit of an outlier? Is it me being American that can't make sense of the records as well? I also know record keeping was less than specific back then as well. Thank you so much for your help. Ancestry DNA is supposedly updating next week and I'm curious to see if there are any genetic communities related to the Forest. I hopped back on this site to look at maps and must have forgot I had this post to respond to.

PS- Were any of these communities in reference part of the "Forest Proper"?