APPENDIX 17
Memorandum submitted by the Woodland Trust
(G22)
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 The Woodland Trust welcomes this opportunity
to submit written evidence to the above 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.
1.2 Our evidence focuses upon the first
two areas outlined by the Committee in its terms of reference
for this inquiry.
2. THE DEPARTMENT'S
VISION STATEMENT
AND PROGRESS
TOWARDS MEETING
THE VISION
2.1 The Trust welcomes the creation of DEFRA
and recognises the achievements of the Department to date, particularly
in the international realm. The vision for the Department as set
out by the Secretary of State is inevitably wide ranging and contains
a good deal that is clearly to be welcomed. In particular we welcome
the prominence afforded to climate change. The statement would
be strengthened however by a more holistic approach to rural development.
Given DEFRA's commitment to sustainable development, the lack
of any reference to forestry is a significant omission, since
it covers some 8 per cent of the land area of England and was
described in the Rural White paper as "a true multi-use activity".[6]
We also believe that greater prominence should be afforded in
the statement to the protection and enhancement of biodiversity
and that the phrase "efficient use of environmental resources"
should be changed to "sustainable use".
2.2 In terms of the meeting of this vision,
we welcome the increased connection which is being made between
rural development and the protection and enhancement of the environment.
We also welcome the personal commitment exhibited by the Department's
ministerial team. However we believe that progress has been slow
in a number of key areas, notably climate change, agriculture
and the integration of sustainable development across Government.
Climate Change
2.3 Whilst Ministers are committed to addressing
climate change and are fulfilling an important communication role
in relation to this issue, progress by the Department itself in
actually taking action is disappointingly slow. The recent scenarios
set out by the UK Climate Impacts Programme confirm how alarming
even the most modest predictions are in terms of the likely impact
of climate change on Britain over the next 50 years.[7]
The fact that one cannot obtain complete certainty should not
deter the taking of precautionary steps to adapt to what is inevitable
change. Certainly the UK Phenology Network (www.phenology.org.uk)
is showing some very strikingly consistent results in relation
to the responses of many species to warmer temperatures eg the
timing of natural events. We warmly welcome the statements that
Ministers in the Department have made about the importance of
addressing climate change but the overriding impression however
is that DEFRA civil servants are being excessively reticent and
are overestimating the degree of uncertainty and amount of time
available for action, especially with regard to the adoption of
adaptation strategies for biodiversity. Relative inaction in this
regard also serves to reinforce the view that there is a need
for the Department and the Government to afford a higher profile
to the promotion of biodiversity generally.
2.4 The Trust believes that adaptive strategies
to conserve biodiversity in the face of climate change must involve
action at the landscape scale and therefore we believe that sustainable
land use becomes a paramount issue and should be the priority
for DEFRA. In fact the need for landscape scale action to place
our natural heritage on a more sustainable footing in the face
of climate change is widely accepted by most environmental NGOs
and a number of Government agencies. The task is rendered more
straightforward by the fact that it is actually unnecessary to
develop a whole new series of adaptive strategies. Making the
agricultural matrix within which much of our wildlife must survive
more environmentally sustainable, and achieving the protection
of our remaining semi-natural habitats such as ancient woodland
from intensive land use and development through buffering, extension
and adequate legislative protection not only provides the space
for biodiversity to adapt in the face of climate change but represents
good conservation practice anyway. What is needed by DEFRA therefore
is enhanced emphasis, resources and the will to implement changes
which are already well acknowledged, understood and being considered.
Agriculture
2.5 DEFRA therefore has the opportunity
to enact landscape scale adaptation measures through existing
tools. A prime example is through the reform of farming policy
where although there have been welcome ministerial statements
on the need for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and support
for the recommendations of the Curry report[8],
progress to date in enacting change has been relatively slow.
2.6 The achievement of real benefits to
rural communities and the achievement of a more sustainable and
accessible countryside requires a major shift in how farming is
funded. We applaud DEFRA's recognition of this but there is a
clear need for further action to back up the rhetoric. Whilst
we recognise that the necessary reduction over time of first pillar
direct payments and the reallocation of these to the second pillar
will take time and involve convincing all EU member states, there
are short and medium term opportunities which it is vital to grasp.
The most obvious case here is the need for modulation to be increased
to 10 per cent as a minimum immediately, as advocated by the Curry
report[9],
and then to the 20 per cent permitted under Agenda 2000 as soon
as possible. This will significantly increase the funds available
for agri-environment schemes which have a critical role to play
in the achievement of a more sustainable countryside. Progress
on this and swifter implementation of the Curry report would send
out the right signals that the Department is firmly committed
to the delivery of its stated aims and objectives.
Sustainable Development
2.7 DEFRA's role as champion within Government
of sustainable development is a crucial one but at present the
evidence that it is succeeding in this role remains patchy. We
warmly welcome the fact that the Treasury is asking Government
Departments to ensure that sustainable development is taken into
account in their bids for the 2002 Spending Review (SR). However
this must be weighted against the widely acknowledged lack of
regard paid by the Planning Green Paper to sustainable development.
Given the centrality of the planning system to the achievement
of sustainable development this must raise questions about the
current relationship between DEFRA and DTLR and the extent of
DEFRA's input into such an important document for the environment.
We believe that there is a strong case for enhancing DEFRA's role
in relation to the integration of sustainable development across
Government and that it should be properly resourced to do so.
2.8 We also believe that there is a need
for an enhanced emphasis upon public engagement with the issues
of sustainable development generally and climate change in particular.
At present public engagement is extremely limited and the "Are
you doing your bit?" campaign has proved lacklustre. The
run up to the Johannesburg Summit would seem to be an ideal opportunity
for a concerted effort to increase public awareness of such crucial
issues.
3. WHETHER, FARMING,
FOOD AND
ENVIRONMENTAL AND
RURAL AFFAIRS
CONCERNS ARE
EACH GIVEN
PROPER WEIGHT
BY THE
DEPARTMENT AND
WHETHER THE
DEPARTMENT IS
ENGINEERED TO
DELIVER ITS
OBJECTIVES
3.1 We welcome the desire for a more holistic
approach to rural issues which has informed the creation of DEFRA
but the impression lingers of a heavy concentration of personnel
in the Department working upon agricultural issues as compared
with the environment. We would like to see this balance redressed
in order to reflect DEFRA's substantially broader remit than the
former MAFF. This should also help to progress important work
on biodiversity and climate change at a swifter pace.
3.2 It is essential to ensure that the urban
environment is not neglected and that DEFRA's focus is not exclusively
upon the environment in rural areas. The urban environment has
a crucial impact upon issues such as house building pressures
in the countryside as well as being the focus of most of the population's
interaction with greenspace and biodiversity. The impression is
conveyed at present that confusion exists as to whether DEFRA
or DTLR is the lead ministry in relation to urban forestry. Similarly,
the delivery of the recommendations of the recent report by the
Urban Green Spaces Task Force[10]
will certainly require close co-operation between DTLR's successor
and DEFRA.
3.3 Finally, as well as the policy dimension,
it is important to ensure that processes in the Department are
attuned to the delivery of the kind of landscape scale action
that is required in the face of climate change. For example, it
is surprising that the current review of agri-environment schemes
in England does not encompass the Farm Woodland Premium Scheme,
which clearly by its very name and nature is a farm based agri-environment
scheme, and that it is instead being considered as part of a separate
review of support for woodland creation in England. This is a
notable omission given that forestry is likely to form an important
part of agri-environment delivery on the farm with land being
diversified for tree planting, as well as its significant wider
contribution to society through the range of public benefits it
is able to deliver. Forestry is the second largest land use after
farming and is integral to rural development, closer attention
to forestry is therefore essential if DEFRA is to fulfil its objectives
of promoting sustainable rural areas, and an attractive and well
managed countryside.
May 2002
6 MAFF/DETR (2000), Our Countryside the Future,
p115. Back
7
Climate Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom; the UKCIP02
Briefing Report (2002). Back
8
Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food (2002), Farming:
a Sustainable Future. Back
9
Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, Op cit
p77. Back
10
Green Spaces, Better Places, Final report of the Urban
Green Spaces Task Force (2002). Back
| 
