Special feature on the forestry 'dilemma' facing the South of Scotland.
by LESTER CROSS
The forestry industry's drive for many more coniferous woodlands across the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway will encourage £150 million of further investment locally by timber processors over the next ten years, it has been claimed.
But the continuous planting of fast growing sitka spruce trees, largely paid for by publicly funded grants, is causing increasing concern in many communities with calls for a much greater emphasis on broadleaved species on newly afforested land.
The sharply contrasting views over the future of the industry in the two regions are clearly seen in a transcript of proceedings at the last meeting of the Convention of the South of Scotland [CoSS]. Representatives from 'both sides of the argument' considered a paper entitled Innovative Forestry and Woodland Creation written by the local authorities, South of Scotland Enterprise and Skills Development Scotland.
There is no denying the importance of forestry so far as the South's economy is concerned.
As the paper pointed out, around a third of new woodlands in Scotland are created in the south, with an economic benefit of around a third of a billion pounds per year and associated employment in wood production, forest management, haulage and processing sectors.
"South of Scotland (SoS) is the biggest timber marketing zone in the UK at over 3.8 million cubic metres of timber removals each year, predominately (but not exclusively) conifer production. The industry delivers 3-5 thousand jobs with three primary processors, including two major sawmills and the only producer of home grown shiplap [overlapping boards] in the UK.
"Forestry in Scotland contributes £1-2 billion GVA each year with approximately 35% of that delivered in the SoS. In addition, since the start of the current Forestry Grant Scheme over £90 million of grants have been given for woodland creation and sustainable forest management, with the SoS issuing more small farm woodland options that any other area."
However, the authors concede that the ways local communities are consulted and included in the decision making about the delivery of woodland creation and forestry management have raised challenges over how the process is currently handled.
"This issue has emerged through the Regional Land Use Partnership (RLUP) process, our Community Wealth Building (CWB) and direct engagement with communities across the region. There is concern that if there is an increase in delivery rates, the scale of land use change in some areas may have unintended negative impacts on the local communities and their associated economies for a long time into the future."
The consultation to date had produced calls for more diversity of species in commercial forestry, more native broadleaf generally (for biodiversity and societal benefit), more robust and effective community consultation and regional and local assessment of cumulative impacts.
"Both local authorities aspire to increase the size of forestry across its administrative border. However, without clarity and transparency of decision making across the SoS there are issues of agency for delivery. The outcomes of the RLUF consultation also indicate there is a need for further work in assessing the cumulative impacts of significant planting. This is currently missing in the woodland creation planning process, as it falls outside the traditional Local Authority planning process and is causing significant community issues. This area of tension is being explored through discussions with SOS communities and will be supported by the Borderlands Natural Capital Programme."
The Convention heard Andy Leitch, deputy chief executive of the Confederation of Forest Industries (Confor) describe the South of Scotland as the engine room of wood production and wood processing, not just in Scotland but mainly in the UK too.
He said current production of two million cubic metres of timber annually was set to double over the next twenty years. The wood-processing sector was already using over two-and-a-half million cubic metres, so there was a gap between what's available in South Scotland and what they're using.
"That's currently being imported from North England, Argyll and Central Scotland. Once we get to 2031, we're in a potentially self-sufficient situation and for the next 10 years, we've got surplus, which might attract additional investment", said Mr Leitch.
He added: "The big issue is where that (level of production) line goes from 2038. It goes downwards and therefore investors are a bit concerned about, uh-oh, if I put my money in now, where's that wood going to be in the future?"
Mr Leitch explained that the processing sector had invested £300 million in the area over the last few years. They had plans to invest another £150 million in the next 10 years in added value. But that money could be invested elsewhere if that timber was not going to be available.
Charles Dundas, chief executive of Borders Forest Trust, told delegates the area's semi-natural broadleaved woodlands were reduced to just a scattering of small remnants - fragmented and fragile. The extremely comprehensive Native Woodland Survey of Scotland had shown that native woodland makes up just 2.6 per cent of the total area of Dumfries and Galloway and only 1.4 per cent of the Scottish Borders. While 19 per cent of Scotland has forestry on it, only one out of every four trees was native and the other three out of four were non-native.
According to Mr Dundas: "We've turned around this historic deforestation pretty quickly, but we've managed it by focusing on fast-growing, non-native productive plantations. It's worth noting that the 25 per cent, 75 per cent split that we see across the rest of the country, that doesn't represent the South of Scotland.
"Just nine per cent of the forestry in Dumfries and Galloway is native, which means 91 per cent is non-native. In the Borders, it's even more imbalanced. Only seven per cent is native, which means 93 per cent of the forestry in the Scottish Borders is non-native. I think that's why we see in the recent RLUP consultation, the public's top priority for land use change across the South of Scotland was for far more native woodland to be planted. It's an imbalance there.
"I would actually like it to go on the record now that as an environmentalist I am saying we need more productive plantations, not less. But we also need far more native woodland. That balance, particularly in the South of Scotland, is out of whack. You've heard it from the public. I'm telling it to you now as well. We need a more balanced landscape."
Morag Paterson, representing Communities for Diverse Forestry, based in Galloway illustrated how much forestry there was in the south, and how much of that was predominantly conifer, albeit with the fringes of broadleaves and open land.
She said: "But the cumulative impact of this level of concentration can't be ignored. It's a real concern for people, whether it's on wildlife, the environment, acidification of rivers or just rural depopulation is also a perceived issue.
"There's a lot of concern about putting all our eggs in one basket with this predominantly one species of tree, albeit I realise it's fast growing and it's very effective and people have bought into it. But that doesn't mean we don't look to the future with our eyes wide open and say, how could we diversify our supplies?"
The concerns over the mass planting of sitka spruce were raised by the Southern Upland Partnership (SUP) in a report published in 2021.
It warned: "There is a real concern that South Scotland is taking more than its’ share of new tree-cover. In addition, disproportionately more of the planting is coniferous forest and much less of the planting is woodland compared to other parts of Scotland.
"There are also concerns that the drive to meet planting targets is pushing forestry onto sites which are not suitable eg peatlands (where the climate benefits are questionable) and species-rich habitats (where there is likely to be a net-loss of biodiversity)."
And SUP claimed: "There is currently, within the region, considerable anti-forestry feeling. Consultation exercises will therefore need to seek to show how land use change can be integrated with other land uses and demonstrate that the proposals can deliver significant local and regional benefits.
"Loss of farming families, loss of open ground, loss of biodiversity, loss of archaeology and cultural heritage, more monotonous landscapes and increased timber movements along poorly maintained roads and through small towns and villages are all regularly blamed on forestry. We suggest more could be done to increase the benefits to local communities (as is done when wind farms are developed)."
No comments:
Post a Comment