The RSPB's South West Regional Policy Officer Mark Robins considers the future of the south west's great uplands...
What brilliant places our south west uplands are - providing masses of wildlife, 34,000 ha of internationally important moorland habitats, along with peat soils storing in excess of 85 million tons of CO2, 90% of the drinking water for the 1.6million people of Devon & Cornwall, 10% of England’s Scheduled Monuments, 285 square miles of public access, and landscapes that are core to the SW regions £5billion tourist industry, yet they are in trouble.
Some 300 farm businesses provide the management of these rugged environments for us all to enjoy. But they face an uncertain future. With falling support payments these farmers are beginning to turn their backs on the moorland and the grazing dependant habitats are being risked.
Here’s an acid test then – surely with all the ingenuity, with all the tools of government, with all that CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) money, with all the good will, we can find a blend of approaches that provides a good future for these farm businesses and secures these fantastic hill environments?
‘At the cross roads’ seemed to be the theme of the last decades chatter about the south west uplands, and many of us hoped that with a new report from Parliament we would be able to see a clear way ahead. What a disappointment then!
The cross-party Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee, in its inquiry into Farming in the Uplands published today (16th Feb), has left our uplands still stuck, not being clear about what direction to take.
The glories of our uplands shout out for a 21st century framework to guide a new package of solutions creating business value for the farmer managers of these places but in way that maintains and does more for the ‘public values’, wildlife, landscape, fresh air, tranquillity, and all the other services these places provide us with. News that the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs committee is recommending a return to ‘headage’ payments for hill farmers is a 20th century retrograde step for farmers and for the environment [see footnote for explanation of “headage” - Ed]
We all want to see land managers rewarded for the positive work they do for fragile upland habitats like blankets bogs and heathland, but this kind of last century thinking could undo all that effort. The risk in this EFRA committee recommendation is that grazing regimes get pushed back to become damaging. [see footnote - Ed]
The EFRA report lacks real ambition, failing to find the right level of innovation. Without this our uplands won’t go much further. The EFRA report will cause barely a ripple - it leaves a big gap in the script. Instead we need sharp impactful government interventions that can and should combine competitive advantage for the livestock farmers of the hills but blended with the delivery of environmental and social ‘goods’.
EFRA fail my acid test then, but the Government can help here, because it is due to publish its own statement on the English uplands in March.
For the RSPB, the uplands are some big islands of relatively bird rich farmed landscape, in a south west sea that is often not so wildlife friendly. For the farming community that provides the grazing management of these places, they need some certainty that making the business choice that favours the environment will get them some sensible reward. We are on common ground here then, a wildlife friendly working landscape must be the 21st century goal. No more hesitancy at confusing cross roads!
The select committee fails to champion the role of hill farmers in safeguarding public benefits in its suggested move "back" to headage payments. Let’s hope Ministers find this kind of ambition and innovation in their soon to be published Uplands Strategy?
The EFRA report is available here
Note: “Headage” payments are paid to producers based on the number of head of a specific type of livestock. Prior to the introduction of single farm payments, subsidies on livestock farms were “coupled” to number of animals. If done without appropriate environmental controls this may lead to overstocking, and as a result, overgrazing.