APPENDIX 21
Memorandum submitted by the Woodland Trust
(A28)
The Woodland Trust welcomes the opportunity
to submit evidence to this Inquiry. The comments that follow are
delivered on behalf of the United Kingdom's leading charity solely
dedicated to the conservation of native and broadleaved woodland.
We achieve our purposes through a combination of acquiring woodland
and sites for planting and through wider advocacy of the importance
of protecting ancient woodland, enhancing its biodiversity, expanding
woodland cover and increasing public enjoyment. We own over 1,100
sites across the country, covering around 18,000 hectares and
we have 250,000 members and supporters.
TURNING OVER
A NEW
LEAF IN
THE COUNTRYSIDE
It is clear that this is a time of extensive
collective reflection over the future of the countryside. It is
important that such reflection adopts a broad view and does not
focus solely upon the farming sector to the exclusion of other
interests. If foot and mouth disease has taught us nothing else
it is that the range of interests dependent upon the countryside
is wider than ever imagined and these include for example forestry
contracting businesses and leisure businesses based on woodland.
The Woodland Trust wishes to see the countryside in its entirety
put in good heart again, action which will benefit woodland because
it is itself a crucial part of the fabric and character of the
countryside in virtually every corner of Britain. We also believe
that there is a good deal that agriculture can learn from forestry
and a need for closer integration between the two sectors. Consequently,
our response will strongly focus upon this theme.
The Woodland Trust believes that farmers possess
valuable skills in caring for the countryside and many are engaged
in doing so already but agricultural policy itself is severely
in need of reform. The CAP in its quest for higher yields has
encouraged the destruction of many wildlife features in the countryside
such as irreplaceable ancient woods, has created only limited
new opportunities for public enjoyment of the countryside and
has helped to undermine understanding between town and country.
The widely desired aim of a countryside which
is defined by quality, more extensive farming, local decision-making
and employment, a strong sense of community, sustainability, enhanced
character and richness of wildlife is one within which woodland—"a
true multi-use activity"—as the Rural White Paper so
accurately put it,[22]
has a significant role to play.
Applying the Experiences of the Forestry Sector
Whilst there has been considerable debate on
the future of the countryside recently we believe that forestry
deserves a more prominent role in the debate than has been the
case so far, not only as an alternative for agriculture land coming
out of production, providing jobs, public access and biodiversity
benefits, but because there are significant parallels between
forestry and farming in terms of moving to provision of wider
public benefits and useful lessons which can be learned.
Forestry is the second largest rural land use
after farming and like the latter we believe its viability is
increasingly dependent upon the provision of public benefits,
such as biodiversity, sustainable produce, local markets and access.
At a time when it is widely recognised that farming must move
away from an approach which is preoccupied with production of
undifferentiated commodities traded on a world market to one which
focuses more widely upon the provision of such benefits the experience
of forestry is an especially relevant one.
Over the past 20 years, forestry has moved from
an approach which was so heavily pre-occupied with timber production
as to undermine public support for the sector through its negative
impact upon the environment and landscapes, towards an increasingly
successful provision of wider benefits which are valued by the
public such as wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities,
although the range of benefits provided by forestry runs far more
widely than this.
We believe that the challenge for farming is
to achieve a similar shift, which could be helped by developing
two processes through which forestry has already passed, albeit
not without considerable effort, collaboration and robust dialogue
over many years.
Firstly, England, Scotland and Wales all possess
forestry strategies (a Northern Ireland one is in preparation
focusing upon the contribution which forestry can bring to life
in each country. The England Forestry Strategy, published in 1998
was an especially ground breaking document with four over arching
themes: Forestry for rural development, forestry for access, recreation
and tourism, forestry for conservation and environment, and forestry
for economic regeneration. The same strategic thinking reflecting
the provision of public benefits needs to be undertaken in the
farming industry.
Secondly, forestry in the UK possesses its own
Government Standard—the UK Forestry Standard which sets
down minimum environmental and social requirements for forestry
operations and as the House of Commons Agriculture Committee itself
noted earlier this year, "provides a framework for forestry
policy throughout the UK".[23]
This in itself is reinforced through the UK Woodland Assurance
Scheme, a voluntary system for independent certification of forest
management. This scheme in turn is mutually recognised by the
Forest Stewardship Council, an international labelling scheme
which provides consumers with the confidence that the products
they have purchased have come from sustainably managed woodlands.
We believe that there is a strong case for the
development of a UK Farming Standard along the lines of the model
described here in the forestry sector, serving to build upon,
strengthen and bring together the standards required under the
NFU's "Little Red Tractor" assurance and other schemes.
The Standard should apply across all farms however and be underpinned
by a basic set of environmental parameters which are reinforced
through the use of cross-compliance and the kind of "broad
and shallow" type of stewardship model represented by the
Tir Cymen pilot scheme in Wales. For example, we believe that
there should be a minimum wildlife habitat requirement on all
farms and standards by which it should be managed.
These two processes, of a strategy and a standard
are worthy of serious examination by the farming sector in order
to achieve a shift to a more outward looking stewardship which
takes account of the need to ensure public confidence and to deliver
wider non-market benefits which are valued and increasingly required
by society.
Production Subsidies and Quotas
We therefore firmly believe that there is a
need to move away from a production oriented approach to one which
places a greater emphasis upon rewarding the provision of benefits
that are valued by the public. We recommend that the Government
increases funding for rural development measures by taking two
particular steps. Firstly, by the UK seeking a greater share of
EU funds at the mid-term review and secondly, by the UK committing
to further modulation between 2003 and 2006. Modulation beyond
the existing 4.5 per cent should not be applied at a flat rate
but should be targeted at large farm businesses which receive
the greatest share of CAP production subsidies and will be best
equipped to withstand cuts in such subsidies. Rural development
initiatives should be supported with at least 20 per cent of the
agriculture budget.
We believe that the UK should lobby for 80 per
cent degressivity in the next round of CAP talks and push for
reforms which will allow forestry to compete on a more level playing
field with agriculture as a land use in rural areas rather than
the present distorting effect which the CAP has on land values.
There is also a need in general for more bespoke forestry measures
under the Rural Development Regulation and to grasp opportunities
to develop genuinely innovative schemes through the RDR which
promote rural diversification and greater integration of farming
and forestry, rather than simply directing EU money through the
usual routes of the Woodland Grant Scheme and Farm Woodland Premium
Scheme.
PROMOTING BETTER
STEWARDSHIP—THE
NEED FOR
AN INTEGRATED
APPROACH
A more economically diverse and physically beautiful
countryside can also be a prosperous one. A more diverse farming
sector which is better integrated with sectors such as forestry
will enhance the environment, economy and society by providing
a wide variety of benefits such as better management of the landscape
and regard for wildlife along with an enhanced rural economy which
is host to a broader range of businesses. The significance of
areas such as the New Forest and the Wye Valley as centres of
tourist activity based upon a backdrop of well wooded landscapes
is worth noting here, as is the overall regeneration contribution
of the National Forest in the Midlands which is delivering a very
wide range of Government sustainable development indicators. The
National Forest's contribution has recently been the subject of
a study carried out by the University of Derby.[24]
Such diversification can benefit society at
large by increasing employment and by providing a more accessible
and attractive countryside for all to enjoy whilst benefiting
consumers by providing increased choice and quality of products.
With regard to the latter issue, we believe it is also important
to educate consumers through proper labelling in order that they
can make informed choices as to the risks posed by cheap food
in terms of environmental degradation, animal welfare and their
own health.
Achieving a more sustainable countryside requires
recognition that farming does not take place in isolation and
that action is needed to achieve area wide benefits at the landscape
scale. The current convergence of interests between farmers, foresters
and other land managers is considerable and imagination is now
required in order to ensure that opportunities for placing the
countryside as a whole on a more sustainable footing are grasped
and that good stewardship in which many farmers are already engaged
is properly rewarded. Such closer integration is vital in order
to properly address issues such as the provision of quality countryside
access and the health benefits it brings, the protection of critical
habitats such as semi-natural ancient woodlands so many of which
occur on farms, and protection of the critical resources of soil,
water and air.
Properly resourced, forestry can provide farmers
with viable and sustainable diversification options for the future.
Native woodland is in many ways a model land use for aiding sustainable
rural regeneration; it provides a renewable harvestable resource,
it can create social benefits, providing opportunities for recreation
and enhancement of well-being, it also performs crucial environmental
functions such as soil and water protection and habitats for wildlife,
as long as it is sustainably managed and semi natural ancient
woodland protected. Woodland therefore has the potential to be
the catalyst for a new movement which can help to refresh the
appearance of the countryside in the light of growing leisure
demands, create genuine opportunities for wildlife to regain a
foothold and set right the fragmentation of wild places over the
last century, help to retain people in rural communities through
local employment and contribute to our renewable energy obligations.
REALISING THE
OPPORTUNITIES
Maximising the benefits provided by woods to
both people and nature is central to the Woodland Trust's aims
and objectives and the Trust has already been engaged in mapping
areas of the country where such effort may be best concentrated
in order to achieve these goals. It is clear that if woodland
biodiversity is to be placed on a more sustainable footing then
our ancient woods (the nation's richest habitat for wildlife,
with 232 species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan) need to be
protected from the impact of intensive land use by adding new
woodland or other sympathetic land uses next to them in a way
which makes for larger and more robust woods, both to protect
them from external intensive land use but also to given them the
space to adapt in the face of climate change.
The agricultural matrix within which much of
our wildlife must survive or through which it moves must be made
more sympathetic to wildlife and more environmentally sustainable.
Woodland and other semi-natural habitats are mutually beneficial
to each other especially where concentrations of such habitats
exist and where there is potential to increase their density further.
If we are to achieve therefore the kind of significant biodiversity
benefits desired by the public and allow as many species as possible
to survive in a time of rapidly changing climate then this will
necessitate, as discussed, much closer integration of farming
and forestry funding schemes.
In particular, we believe there is a strong
case for the creation of a much larger, unified agri-environment
scheme to involve the vast majority of farmers (the enormous popularity
of the current over-subscribed Farm Woodland Premium Scheme is
worth noting in this regard), placing new emphasis on achieving
benefits at a landscape scale, targeting buffering and extension
of semi-natural habitats and creating more favourable conditions
for the creation of larger semi-natural habitats. We believe that
wood pasture systems, which combine forestry and grazing may be
an ideal way of continuing farming practices but at a much lower
intensity within concentrations of ancient woodland. Wood pasture
is an ideal example of a landscape sympathetic to wildlife, which
can still produce agricultural product (meat) but also the kind
of habitat that will produce a product with added wildlife and
landscape value.
Also central to the promotion of a lower intensity
farming system which enhances biodiversity and fulfils a growing
consumer demand, is the need to properly reward organic farming.
We believe that there is a strong case for ensuring that organic
farming is able to operate upon a more level playing field. This
means that organic farmers should be eligible for the same payments
received by any other farmers and that farmers making the choice
to move to organic stewardship should be supported during the
often difficult and uncertain post-conversion period. Organic
farms should be rewarded for sensitive stewardship of the countryside
through the kind of "broad and shallow" approach described
earlier. They should also be equally as eligible for agri-environment
schemes as any other farm. However such eligibility will especially
benefit the organic sector since given the nature of the farming
process involved it will be easier to achieve these "broad
and shallow requirements" than on a conventional farm. It
is likely that organic farms will also achieve higher payments
for positive management of countryside features more easily than
a conventional farm. Through such an approach organic farming
may be both incentivised and supported after the conversion period.
Wood as a fuel
There are also important opportunities arising
through closer integration of forestry and farming to address
the UK's renewable energy obligations which should be grasped.
We favour a model where wood fuel from local woods is used by
small-scale heat and electricity generating plants serving local
users. This would create jobs in the local area, help to improve
the local environment and ensure that the impact of transportation
is kept to a minimum. It is possible for example, to envisage
local leisure centres and schools utilising Combined Heat and
Power (CHP) schemes along such lines.
Research
We believe that there is a need for more funds
to be allocated for further research into sustainable farming
practices and that the moratorium on commercial growth of GMOs
should be maintained until trials have shown that they pose no
threat to the environment. It is vital that DEFRA drive forward
research into the kind of public benefits that are to be derived
from the farming industry of the future. Research strategies need
to better reflect the objectives of the newly created DEFRA rather
than the commercial concerns of bodies such as agro-chemical companies
for example.
Training and Advice
Finally and importantly, there is a clear need
in an era of change and opportunity to develop a network of advisory
services in rural areas (especially those areas where readjustment
is likely to be most difficult), which offer integrated business
and environmental advice. The provision of "one stop advisory
shops" which offer information on sources of funding, can
help prepare forward looking farm businesses and environmental
plans, and give high quality advice is essential. The current
Farm Business Advisory Service is insufficient to help farmers
adapt to the present situation and there is a need for advisory
services which can help farmers to focus less upon subsidised
production and more upon responsiveness to market demand and diversification
into areas such as forestry and the provision of non-market benefits.
12 December 2001
22 MAFF/DETR (2000), Our Countryside: the Future;
a Fair Deal for Rural England, p 115. Back
23
HoC Agriculture Committee Fifth Report, Session 2000-01, "The
Work of the Forestry Commission", p vi. Back
24
"The Social and Economic Impact of the National Forest .
. . Much More Than Trees", University of Derby Research and
Evaluation Service (2001). Back
| 
