England: Grouse moors and conservation bodies join forces

Therese Coffey, MP at Wemmergill
flanked by Richard Johnson (Director)(L) and John Pinkney (Headkeeper)(R).
Photo: Dave Mitchell, Natural England

The Moorland Association reports on the new 25-year agreement between Natural England and the Wemmergill Estate, in Co Durham, which amongst other objectives, seeks to develop and maintain a fully functioning blanket bog system.

Dr Therese Coffey MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary at DEFRA, and Dr Rob Stoneman, Co-Chair of IUCN UK Peatland Programme, have visited the estate and both are very supportive of this work.

This agreement is being supported by the Trust's work with Natural England to promote their Outcomes Approach and as Chairman of the Uplands Management Group, which is developing guidance for managing sphagnum mosses, a key component of blanket bog, through a task & finish group led by Amanda Anderson, The Director of the Moorland Association.

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!

Upland Stakeholders Forum and the Upland Outcomes Approach

I attended the meeting of the Upland Stakeholder Forum (USF) in London, last week. 

The remit of this cross-sector group is to consider upland issues in England, and after some updates, the focus of the meeting was on the Outcomes Approach that is being rolled out by Natural England (NE).  

This initiative was the subject of the five workshops that I ran for NE in different parts of the English Uplands in March, this year, and the Summary Report that I produced for NE is available to download. I also reported on these workshops in the Trust’s Annual Report, this year.

What is the Outcomes Approach?  In simple terms, it involves Natural England working more closely with stakeholders to achieve an agreed, shared vision for land, including the uplands. Flexibility is part of the concept so that a ‘one size fits all’ approach will be avoided. 

For this Approach to achieve its potential it needs to be adopted fully by NE and all stakeholders. During the meeting, the Moorland Association confirmed that the Approach has been promoted to its members and NE outlined how they have been working to introduce the concept to its staff; they recognise that it will require a bit of a culture shift. 

I am a great supporter of this initiative, which I think offers benefits for NE, stakeholders and above all, the English uplands. In my view, it is long overdue, and I am keen to support the roll out of the Approach. I would like to see more demonstration events being held, as part of the promotion process, as I believe that the ‘talk & walk’ style of event is a powerful way to communicate with NE stakeholders and staff  alike.

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.

Recent Activity 2: Defra and the NE Upland Evidence Review

Rather later than anticipated, here is the promised update following the meeting of Defra's Upland Stakeholder Forum (USF) at the beginning of May.  I have developed this to include a summary of the recent developments with Natural England's Upland Evidence Review and Upland Guidance Refresh, which form part of the work of the USF.  This post also encompasses some comment about the input from the Best Practice Burning Group.  This interlinking may appear to complicate matters, but it is significant.  We must not attempt to consider issues in isolation, especially when they are so  important.  Nature works in a joined up way, with much interdependency between the different systems, and if we want to understand and engage with what is going on, we must work in the same way.

What follows is lengthy and involved.  I fear that a casual reader of these words may already be confused and turned off, but if you have an interest in the English uplands, I would encourage you to wade through this.  It is complicated, but it is also important for the future of these areas.

Defra Upland Stakeholder Forum meeting

The Defra Upland Stakeholder Forum meeting was held in London on Thursday afternoon, 1^st May.  Briefings were provided about the New Environmental Land Management Scheme (NELMS), and the thinking behind the moorland uplift (the increase in the CAP payment for farmers on moorland), but a lot of the discussion took place around Natural England’s ‘evidence to advice’ phase coming out of the Upland Evidence Review that concluded in May 2013.  In the all pervasive corporate speak, this work operates under the title of the Upland Guidance Refresh.  There is support for much of the output from this work, but part of the guidance from the ‘restoration of blanket bog’ and the ‘effects of managed burning’ topics, which has been considered together, has proved to be contentious.  During the meeting, Natural England expressed regret about the way that some of the guidance had been published, with some justification, and this was gratefully acknowledged.

The Upland Evidence Review and the Upland Guidance Refresh

To refresh memories, reports from all the review topics were published on 30 May 2013 (see the NE website) and the five topics covered by the Upland Evidence Review (UER) were:

▪       The impacts of tracks on the integrity and hydrological function of blanket peat;

▪       Restoration of degraded blanket bog;

▪       The effects of managed burning on upland peatland biodiversity, carbon and water;

▪       Upland hay meadows: what management regimes maintain the diversity of meadow flora and populations of breeding birds; and

▪       Moorland grazing and stocking rates.

As part of the next ‘evidence to advice’ phase, the Uplands Guidance Refresh, three levels of guidance are being produced:

• Tier 1: Quick Start guidance – the approach, processes and systems that Natural England staff will use in the uplands, which is relevant to all uplands casework;
•  Tier 2: Upland Principles – summary guidance to provide a non-technical summary for each of the five topics to be used by Natural England Staff; and
•  Tier 3: Upland Practitioner - detailed guidance to provide more technical guidance for all five topics, along with links to further information and technical reports, where appropriate.

The Tier 2 guidance for the burning and peatland restoration topics covered by the UER has been combined into one document and this was published in draft in time for consideration at the first meeting Best Practice Burning Group this year, on 11 February.  The guidance came in for heavy criticism and it made for an ‘interesting’ meeting!  For my sins, I had been asked to chair this meeting, which gave me little chance to express my own concerns, but it was clear that there was little, if any, support for this Tier 2 guidance.

As part of the stakeholder engagement process of the Upland Guidance Refresh, with the Moorland Association, Yorkshire Water and the RSPB, I had already been invited to attend a further meeting with Natural England, during the week after the Burning Group meeting.  This gave me an opportunity to express the Trust’s views fully.  This small group met again on 17 April to visit a moor at the north end of Nidderdale and it was during this visit that a better understanding between the various factions started to emerge. 

The Best Practice Burning Group next met on 30 April and this was a site visit in Coverdale.  Here the Burning Group was shown a grouse moor that was being managed sensitively for peatland re-wetting while still producing grouse.  More progress!

It is not all bad news.  Natural England has expressed a genuine desire to get the UGR guidance right and the message could be worked with, but the form of the initial Tier 2 guidance about burning and restoration was bound to cause offence to owners and managers of moorland and lead to alienation.  It had started from the wrong direction. 

There is widespread acceptance that management of deep peat needs to be more sensitive to the needs of these areas, but a complete ban on burning is not the answer.  The social and economic interests associated with peatland areas must be taken into account and other impacts must be considered.  A large, negative impact on grouse production would remove a vast amount of investment into these areas, and the loss of burning as a tool could lead to a large increase in food for wildfires.

I am not proposing that the messages coming out of our increasing knowledge, understanding and appreciation of peatlands are ignored, far from it.  However, I cannot accept that a ban on burning is the panacea for all ills, as it is often presented.  A much more intelligent, joined-up approach is required that reflects everyone’s interests.  The value of our uplands, moorlands and peatlands to provide natural services (ecosystem services) is being recognised and this is of benefit to all of us.  However, our regulators must learn to work with the owners and managers of land and to do this some compromise is required.  Everyone cannot have everything they would like.

Working together with compromise and understanding will achieve much more in the longer term than short term initiatives imposed against the grain of current upland management tradition.

Where to Next?

1.  The Upland Guidance Refresh.

Currently, the Tier 2 guidance for the burning & restoration topics has been mothballed and the development of the Tier 3 guidance is being planned using a more collaborative process.  This will allow stakeholders to have some input to the development of the guidance rather than being presented with Natural England’s solution to comment on.  This is a move towards proper consultation which will be mush more effective!

I will be part of a sub-group of the Burning Group to help with the development of the Tier 3 guidance.  I will be working alongside the Moorland Association, the RSPB, Yorkshire Water, the National Gamekeepers Organisation and a grouse moor manager.  This will involve several site visits to different parts of the English uplands so that we can feed a range of different conditions into the guidance.

Assuming we can achieve some balanced acceptable guidance at the Tier 3 level, the hope is that the Tier 2 guidance can be re-visited and revised in the light of agreement about Tier 3.

2. The Upland Evidence Review - Phase 2

In the meantime the UER has moved on and phase 2 is considering new topics:

• Heather beetle (we are not doing this, but we will be fascinated by what is produced)
• Habitat restoration (initially a wide search to identify priority habitats for detailed review).
• Wind turbines and bats (onshore)
• Wind turbines and birds (offshore)

3.  User Testing
Earlier in the year I was asked to organise four events to take place in March across England to test the guidance coming out of the Upland Guidance Refresh process.  It was decided that the guidance was not ready for testing and the events were postponed.

I believe passionately that discussion with a cross-sector group, while standing in 'the purple stuff', is an invaluable tool in the effort to raise understanding of upland management issues and how they interrelate.  I very much hope that we can return to run these events, later in the year.

4. Other Initiatives

There is plenty else going on in England, and I will report on additional topics as time is available.  These include:

• The formation of an Uplands Alliance;
•  The development of the National Centre for the Uplands at Newton Rigg College, Penrith;
• The development of a Peatland Carbon Code to provide a route for private sector funding into peatland restoration;
•  The work of the England & Wales Wildfire Forum.

Defra Upland Stakeholder Forum

I attended a meeting of the Defra Upland Stakeholder Forum (USF) in London, on 9 January.  This was the last meeting under the current Chairman, Robin Mortimer, who established this Forum; he is leaving Defra and it remains to be seen what direction the Forum will take under his successor.

In the 18 months since its formation, the main role of the USF has been to provide input into the Upland Delivery Review carried out by Natural England.  This has been a bureaucratic process but the end is in sight, and hopefully the USF has helped Natural England deliver some notable improvements to the way they operate with 'stakeholders'.

The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, and the Trust is running four 'stakeholder engagement events' in different part of the English Uplands to test the emerging ideas in practical settings.  I will provide an update separately as this work progresses.

Implementation of CAP announced

Defra has announced details of the CAP review in England and the amount of money that is to be transferred from Pillar 1 to Pillar 2. Initially, this has been restricted to 12% rather than the 15% that had been muted.

The understandable aim has been to ensure that the income to farmers from single farm payment is secure and that less depends on applications for environmental grant funding.  The shift towards to Pillar 2 will continue and with it will come the greater control over the environmental benefits that public funding will deliver.  There is a logic to this, but I am wary of it being taken to extremes that will stifle farming's entrepreneurial skills.  The ideal to my mind is knowledgeable farmers who have the enthusiasm and funds to apply their skills to the management of their land.  The old cry of 'it is difficult to be green when you are in the red' still rings very true.  Local, well-motivated people are always going to achieve more than broad brush control from a distant office.  Perhaps we need to focus more effort on explaining to our farmers and the other managers of land what is required and why.

The Defra website has no shortage of additional information.

CAP reform package delayed until 2015

Photo: FWi

It has been confirmed that CAP reform will not come into effect until 1 January 2015.  See the announcement in Farmers Weekly.

NFU president Peter Kendall has said that putting implementation back a year adds "a massive area of uncertainty that needs to be addressed going forward".  I fear that this is likely to be an understatement.

Defra: Upland Stakeholders Forum

I attended the third meeting of this Forum in London on 10 September.  The Forum met for the first time in July but a series of quick-fire meetings are being held to gather some momentum and reach a decision on its future role.  There will be two more meetings before the end of the year.

The Forum has been reviewing strategic upland issues and receiving updates from Natural England on the work they are engaged with (following the Walshaw Moor inquiry) that includes the Review of Upland Evidence and a revision of the consenting regime for work on Sites of Special Scientific Interest.  I have volunteered to provide some input to the review of the consenting regime and there is hope that it might be possible to introduce arrangements to allow some minor works to be granted deemed consent, providing there are adequate safeguards.

Other topics discussed include the review of the Less Favoured Areas regime, to become Areas of Natural Constraint, and I sneaked in a briefing about heather beetle.

The Moorland Burning Working Group will be providing an input to this Forum, and Arik Dondi from Defra, who is part of this Forum, has taken over as Chairman of the Burning Group.

A Hen harrier sub-group has been formed and this will be considering Hen harrier issues in conjunction with the Environment Council led initiative, which faces an uncertain future following the withdrawal of the RSPB.

It is good for the Trust to providing some input into discussions at this level in England and I am able to bring my experience of what is taking place elsewhere in the UK to the discussions.

In view of his responsibility for English upland policy, Adam Smith, GWCT Director for Scotland, joined the Forum at this meeting, and he will also be able to provide some cross-border input.