Commercial forestry plantation of pine and larch by Andy Hay (rspb-images.com)
Earlier this week I wrote about RSPB Scotland’s vision for forestry and the opportunities presented by Brexit to ensure that nature gets the best deal from future policy in this area. Whilst the bigger European changes are playing out, the Scottish Government is continuing to seek to make changes to the way forestry operates in Scotland. Scottish Ministers already set policy priorities and they are now consulting on how best to achieve the full devolution of forestry. The outcomes from the “Future of Forestry in Scotland” consultation1 will inform the preparation of a new Forestry Bill, which will replace the current Forestry Acts from 1967.
In our response to the consultation we will be emphasising the need to protect the functions which have traditionally been delivered by the Forestry Commission. We are particularly keen to ensure that current working relationships with the UK government and Welsh Assembly are maintained to deliver cross-border priorities such as research, pest and disease management and representation for the UK at an international level. The proposal to create a new body called Forestry and Land Scotland is particularly interesting and we have a number of key questions that we will be challenging the Scottish Government with over the course of the consultation. Publicly owned land is really about more than timber production, and that needs to acknowledged from the outset. Public land must be recognised as a national asset, and be protected and managed for the good of the nation.
Another consultation currently running is seeking to raise the threshold at which a forestry scheme would require an Environmental Impact Assessment2 to be made. Currently proposals for the planting of any woodland on “sensitive areas” (e.g. designated sites) and for schemes over 5 hectares in size on “non-sensitive” sites must be assessed to determine whether they will have a negative impact upon the environment, including wildlife. The Scottish Government is proposing raising this threshold to 20 hectares for schemes on non-sensitive sites. We are concerned that this will raise the possibility of serious harm being done to the open ground habitats where rapidly declining species like curlew and lapwing have their strongholds. The science tells us that fragmenting areas where they nest with forestry leads to a rapid loss in the number of pairs found there. Hence we are opposed to the raising of the thresholds, unless other safeguards can be implemented.
We are entering a period of change for the forestry industry and there is still much uncertainty about what the future holds. However, we also have a once in a generation opportunity to influence not only the ways in which funding and regulation are delivered, but also the very principles upon which the way our countryside is managed, and will look in decades to come. Now is the time to make the changes which will deliver for nature now, and long into the future.
References