"A New Direction for Scottish Land Management"

In the uncertainty that surrounds the future of our uplands and moorlands, it is essential that a clear case needs to be made for what we, those who are actively engaged in the management of the  uplands and moorlands, want.  Without this clear statement, we may end up with something that the politicians and civil servants believe we want, which may be rather different.

Without strong justification, the uplands and moorlands may lose out to schools, hospitals and other drains on the government's budget.  It is a fact that the competing claims on the budget are likely to attract more votes than 'messing about in the hills'.

The possibility of developing an Upland Vision in Scotland has been kicked around for several years, and arguably it is needed more than ever now, to fill the vacuum in thinking about the future.  This was discussed during the meeting of Scotland's Moorland Forum, yesterday, and as a result, Forum members will be considering how they can take some initiative.

Scottish Land & Estates has published A New Direction for Scottish Land Management, and the organisation believes that in future:

• It will be increasingly important that farming and forestry are able to put forward the strongest justification for ongoing public investment in these sectors.
• There should be a greater emphasis on farming and land management delivering public goods, such as helping mitigate flooding, providing clean water, enhancing biodiversity or reducing carbon emissions.
• In the shorter-term, enhancing the profitability of our land-based businesses needs to be a top priority.

I can support the SL&E approach, and I think it is a very good starting point for a wider discussion about what we want for these areas.  if we do not know, who does?

Defra Uplands Stakeholder Forum

I attended the latest meeting of this Forum in London, on Thursday, last week. The Trust is a founder member of this Forum, which was set up by Defra in 2012; it aims to bring together all the interests with a stake in the English uplands.

Meeting Outline
I provided an update on the Trust's work with the Uplands Management Group (T&F Groups working); Bracken Control (Asulam available in 2017); and the England & Wales Wildfire Forum (Wildfire Risk Assessment nearly ready to publish, Wildfire conference being proposed in Dorset - November 2017).

We then covered the development of the 25-year plans for the Environment and Food, Farming & Fishing, which is a major policy undertaking for Defra, especially so, since the Brexit vote.  We also discussed the development of the Natural Capital Approach that is a new kid on the block.  The feeling of the meeting was that while Natural Capital was an interesting concept, it will not raise interest from the owners and managers of land until there is some incentive for completing a Natural Capital Plan.  Until then, this is an interesting topic for the policy and research communities that has little practical application.

The exception to the lack of application is the National Trust's initiative outlined in the Green Alliance's report New Markets for Land and Nature, which introduces a proposed Natural Infrastructure Scheme.  This was outlined during the meeting and while it is clearly fraught with difficulty, the National Trust is to be applauded for taking the plunge and investing time and effort in this.  It might provide a model to develop further.

Forum Governance
I have my reservations about this Forum, as I think it has lost its way, recently.  I hope that Defra will provide the time and energy that it deserves and needs to get it back on track.  We need a place where people can come together to discuss views and ideas and help Defra, and the other governement agencies, to develop policy that will be relevant to the stakeholders that members of the Forum represent.

To take full advantage of the meetings they should be an opportunity for discussion to draw on the knowledge and experience of the members of the Forum.  They should not just be a vehicle to present the government's solutions that have already been decided.

The Forum should provide an opportunity to engage with stakeholder views.  After all, until stakeholders are encouraged, coerced or paid to do something different, nothing will happen and all policy initiatives are a waste of effort. Stakeholders are the delivery mechanism and need to be treated with intelligence and respect!

Poverty, not Wealth, is the Greater Threat to Wildlife

The publication of the latest State of Nature report (It's not too late to save nature in the UK, but we must act now to protect the future of our wildlife) prompted Matt Ridley to provide his own view.

It is perhaps unfashionable to think so, but maybe we are not doing so badly for our wildlife in the wealthier countries.

"The reason rich people are now able to live alongside wildlife in a way that poor people do not is partly because, once liberated from mere subsistence, they can afford to care."  

See the full story in Matt Ridley's Blog.

The National Trust and Thorneythwaite

I am a long term supporter of the National Trust, but I am also a passionate supporter of the role played by farmers in the management of the uplands and in their support for local communities.

I had some input into the recent revision of the National sheep Association's publication: The Complementary Role of sheep in Upland and Hill Areas which endorses the value that sheep and sheep farmers bring to remote rural areas.

The National Trust's activities in Cumbria cut across the principles that the NSA has espoused in this publication.  The background to this spat has been neatly summarised by Tim Bonner, Chief Executive of the Countryside Alliance in his Editorial published this morning.  I fully support his views.  For convenience I repeat the text of the editorial below.


The National Trust and Thorneythwaite

The National Trust is a huge organisation which owns both very large numbers of historic and important buildings and swathes of wonderful countryside. Its long record of preserving the nation's heritage is extraordinary and across its vast estate it would be ludicrous to expect every decision it makes to please everyone.

The current outcry over the Trust's decision to purchase land at Thorneythwaite Farm in Borrowdale, Cumbria at an inflated price, and in doing so prevent local farmers from maintaining the farm as a traditional domestic agricultural holding, may however be more than just a disagreement. Underlying the concern stated so clearly by the local farming community and its supporters like Lord Bragg is a feeling that the Trust consciously, or more likely unconsciously, has adopted a part of the modern environmentalist creed which suggests that human input into the countryside is in nearly all ways negative and should be minimised.

Rather than celebrating the fact that nearly every landscape in our islands was created, and has been maintained, by generations of farmers this ideology believes that farmers are a problem, and that radically different management with less intervention is preferable. This would obviously not conserve the countryside in its current form but radically change it both by altering landscapes and, crucially, removing the role of the the indigenous population. People are not a fashionable concern amongst these environmentalists, but the countryside is not just a collection of fields, woods and fells viewed from a train window. It is every bit as much about the communities who live and work in that landscape.

The National Trust should, and largely does, understand this, but in Borrowdale it has made a mistake. I hope that it is big enough to admit that, to negotiate with the new owners of the farm buildings at Thorneythwaite to put the farm back together and, most importantly, to put the rural community back at the centre of its decision making processes. It has as much of a duty to conserve the community that created the Cumbrian landscape as it does to conserve that landscape itself.

Tim Bonner
Chief Executive
Follow me on Twitter @CA_TimB

HT at the CLA Game Fair

It was a good day at Harewood, yesterday, for the CLA Game Fair.  There was good representation from the organisations that we work with, and some we would like to work with.  As ever, the gathering of the clans provided an opportunity to catch up with people I have not seen for a while, for many years in some cases, and to exchange views about what has happened and what we would like to happen.

I attended the workshop in the Game Fair Theatre that assembled: Owen Paterson (former Sec of State for Environment), Mark Avery (former Conservation Director, RSPB), Philip Merricks (Farmer & Chairman, Hawk & Owl Trust) and Ian Coghill (Chairman, GWCT).  The topic for discussion was "Landowners and Wildlife: Friends or Foes?".  There was an interesting exchange of contrasting views:  Owen Paterson quoted 'when the state owns; nobody owns and, when nobody owns, nobody cares' and Mark Avery followed him by stating a wish for more public ownership of land.   Messrs Coghill and Avery sought to score points off each other, and Philip Merricks commented that the adversarial approach is ineffective and there is no alternative but to be friends.  In spite of these contrasting views, the discussion did not really take off, and we came away none the wiser.

From a Heather Trust perspective, I side with Philip Merricks.  We need dialogue and a commitment to move forward; brick throwing from silos will generate heat, but no light.  Owen Paterson proved that he is a loss to front bench politics.

Wednesday: London - Upland Stakeholder Meeting

This was a day that I got some train miles under my belt.  The first leg was Dumfries to London and this was followed by catching the sleeper to Aviemore.

The draw of London was the Upland Stakeholder Forum meeting that is run by Defra.  It has been going about three years and is getting into its stride.  The role that is developing for this Forum is to provide a strategic framework for all upland issues.  However, the Group highlighted that the most important function for Defra is to show leadership and give direction to the discussions about the many and varied upland issues.

Lord de Mauley, the Defra Minister attended part of the meeting to hear at first hand about some of the issues.

We discussed the formation of the Uplands Alliance, and how a reformed Best Practice Burning Group might relate to the USF as a Best practice Group to represent the views and experience of practitioners.  The Group also discussed the proposal for Defra to facilitate a large application for LIFE funds (~£100m) to deliver improvements in peatland management across the UK over a 10 year period.  I am impressed by the scale of this thinking and it is exactly the sort of work that Defra should be tackling to show leadership.

The Forum also allows an opportunity for members to share ideas and news of up and coming events.  Topics included CAP Reform, the Defra sponsored Hen Harrier initiative, and Natural England's Upland Outcomes Framework.  Some of this falls well short of being riveting but the Forum provides a useful opportunity to air this sort of information.

Scotland: Land Reform Review Group report published

The final report from the Land Reform Group, commissioned by the Scottish Government, was published on Friday 23rd May 2014

Savills have published their view of the Report and I suggest that this offers a useful summary and a balanced response.  They have recommended a measured approach:
"Land and property owners need to be aware that change is ahead, but there is not much action that can be taken at this point in time. The Scottish political scene is very 'noisy' at present and owners would be best advised to reflect carefully on the report, and to participate fully in the public consultations and legislative programme that will ensue post the Referendum."