Cymraeg The new English Woodland Creation Offer scheme has been released from DEFRA. It is accompanied by a 38 page ‘England Trees Action Plan’ which aims to spend £500m on trees and woodland up to 2025 and get up to 30,000ha new planting by 2024. In this response, LWA Coordinating Group Member Oli Rodker delves into the details of the ups and downs of this new scheme.
The Plan is full of fine sounding words and commitments, which can certainly be supported, and some genuine steps forward. Mention of the need to link people with forests, and to encourage management, having dual purpose commercial and amenity woodlands, aligning peatland and woodland strategy, and supporting the UK tree nursery sector are all good.
However there is still a chronic lack of ambition given the crisis we are in, and there is shockingly little detail on how and exactly what the money will be spent on, even as they promise to “ support” numerous ideas and Working Groups. The good intentions also serve to mask the hidden support for an economic model that prioritises profits over people and climate, and that is causing the very problems the Plan is aimed to resolve. Without a recognition of root causes one has to doubt whether the solutions will be properly systemic.
For instance, the section on Ancient Woodland says that it is an “irreplaceable habitat” and confirms the “commitment…. to the value of our ancient woodland”. Meanwhile, the Government’s own HS2 project is causing ‘loss or damage’ to 108 ancient woodlands.
The government’s somewhat deeper commitment to private sector finance is obliquely referred to on page 22: “Our goals can only be met through greater investment by the private sector in woodland creation. ….our grant offers must act to stimulate private investment, …. rather than crowding private sector investment out.” This reveals the long term aim is reduce government funding where possible and get the private sector to fill the gaps.
The Plan does mention using employment in forestry to do some ‘levelling up’. LWA certainly welcomes an approach that wants to see increased timber used in building and construction, and obviously that is not just the task of DEFRA. However there is a surprising lack of content around aims for conifer plantings, which can provide straight timber at faster rates than many broadleaves, and which are the bulk of our current imports. We agree that amenity and commercial use can go hand in hand but we need to ensure a good mix of species in useable blocks. It is not good enough to protect our own native woods here and then be buying in other people’s native woods to do our construction work.
As for their overall targets? For a start the net zero by 2050 is 20 years too late. A 2050 date will allow billions of additional tonnes of emissions to be released, that people and planet simply cannot afford (and that is on a benign interpretation of net zero which does not simply off load and offset our emissions onto other countries). Secondly, we need millions of new acres of trees by 2030. Using all means and strategies at our disposal these should be in cities, in agroforestry schemes on farms, in shelter belts and through larger scale woodland plantings. Only government has the funds and the oversight to make sure this happens in the right place, in the right way, and to get it happening quickly enough. The government has been told this numerous times, but continues to act as if a crisis is on the distant horizon, rather than right here. This Plan would have been about right in 1995 , the year of COP1, but not in 2021.
The Plan also echoes the CCC target of 10% of arable and grassland to be in agroforestry by 2050. But why only 10%? Farmers are showing huge enthusiasm for this right now, and while some areas like valuable grasslands and peatlands are best without trees, most land could benefit from tree alleys and belts. Why not have an 80% target and provide the finances to make it so?
Broadly speaking, we welcome these commitments , but we want to see that they are properly backed up by funds, resources and legislation where necessary. The grants for woodland creation will be gratefully received by our members – once they can get through the forms – but we must not let the surrounding fanfare be simply more hot air.
Photo credit: Hazel Hill Wood
