A "Bottom-up" approach but with far less crap please!

Let me draw your attention to a gentle rant published by Peter Thompson on his GWCT Blog.  He may be referring to a lowland river system, but his concerns about bureaucracy stifling progress and the lack of a link to any action rings true in any location.

A policy, initiative or project, no matter how good or bad it is, will only achieve something when it leads to some action. In relation to land, this means that the owner or manager of the land must understand what is being suggested and agree to act on it. Progress can only be measured by action on the ground.

Ideas come easy; implementation can be more difficult. The owners and managers of land are the delivery agent and for success must be involved in the development from the start.  However, owners and managers are busy people and are not sitting around waiting for the next shiny initiative to be delivered to them.  We need to make it easy for them, and everybody else, to understand what is being proposed by implementing a cutting the crap.

Peatland Management & Restoration

Photo: Andy Hay / RSPB Images

See the article on the BBC News website for full details about a £4m grant for the Flow Country.  The Trust supported the initial grant application submitted to the Heritage Lottery Fund but it has taken about 12 months to get to this stage.  This demonstrates the commitment and pump-priming funding that needed, when pursuing these big grants.  

The funding represents a major funding boost for peatland restoration in the Flow Country and will work alongside the £15m of funding being provided by the Scottish Government for the Peatland ACTION project, thick operates throughout Scotland.  I am involved with Peatland ACTION through the Peatland Steering Group and Scotland's Moorland Forum and the Forum hopes to provide some input into running events for Peatland ACTION to help link theory to practice.

I am also supporting the development of the Peatland Carbon Code that seeks to develop a protocol that will allow private sector funding to be provided for peatland restoration and carbon capture.  This work, which is being sponsored by Defra, covers the UK and I am attending a steering group meeting in London, next week.  A key issue in the debate is the role of burning in peatland restoration, which I believe has a role, and this links to the discussions within the Best Practice Burning Group in England.

The Trust is living up to its strap line of "Promoting Integrated Moorland Management"!

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."

Retirement of a Moorland Icon

Today marks the retirement of Martin Gillibrand, who has been a force, an irresistible force some would say, to be reckoned with in the English uplands since before most people can remember.  There some impressive statistics in the Lancashire Evening Post article about his outstanding contribution to the English uplands during his period as Secretary of the Moorland Association.

I have watched him in action through long hours of debate in the Best Practice Burning Group, which  Marin was instrumental in setting up.  We have completed 36 meetings together and we are still counting and still talking. Every time that progress looked like it was flagging Martin was ready with his verbal whips to spur us into more action. He will be missed in these meetings, even though there remains no shortage of issues to debate.

I wish him well in his retirement and I look forward to continuing a close relationship with the Moorland Association through the new Director, Amanda Anderson, who has taken over from Martin.

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.

Heather Trust - Recent Activity 1

After a busy period at The Heather Trust, and with the dust settling on the Country Market & Sporting Sale, I am reflecting on recent activity. I will cover this in a few posts but let’s work backwards.

The Country Market & Sporting Sale closed at noon on Friday, 2nd May. The Sale takes place in an increasingly competitive market but our members and supporters have surpassed themselves this year. At the end of the Sale the headline income figure was £45,000, but some negotiations have taken place since and, with a few more to be concluded, it is clear that we have broken through the £50,000 barrier, this year.

The answer to the ‘so what’ question is that the Sale provides us with the funding for the representational work, some of which will be described in the posts that follow over the next few days. Our presence in the various debates is an important part of the justification for the Trust’s existence and increasingly our common sense message is being heard in high places.

The period leading up to the Sale included four meetings of note and so that you know what to look out for, working backwards the meetings included: the Defra Upland Stakeholder Forum, an inaugural meeting of the Uplands Alliance, the Best Practice Burning Group and a meeting on Molland Moor to launch a new project.

Country Market & Sporting Sale 2014

The Sale has now closed for another year.

Thank you to all our members and supporters who have given so generously to make the Sale a success, yet again.  I am aware that we have badgered and cajoled people shamelessly over the last few weeks and months but thank you to the many who have risen to the challenge.

I have been on a slightly gruelling tour of England this week that in two days covered meetings of the Best Practice Burning Group, the new Uplands Alliance and the Defra Upland Stakeholder Forum.  I was conscious throughout the trip that this work is funded by the generosity of our members and supporters.  I will add some words about these meetings when the dust of the Sale settles.

Bracken busters!

The Scottish Farmer has published a timely article that reminds anyone who wants to control bracken that the control season will start on 1st July.

I will be receiving the Emergency Authorisation letter from the Chemicals Regulation Directorate on 19 May and I will make the letter available on the Bracken Control Group's website.

DEFRA confirms moorland payment rise

The article in Farmers Weekly records the good news for moorland farmers in England of an increase of £26/ha in the moorland payment under CAP from 1 January 2015.

Exmoor - The Graze the Moor project

Our bid, on behalf of the Molland Estate, for project funding from the Exmoor National Park has been successful.

I have been working on Molland Moor on the south side of Exmoor since 2002, and during the last 2 years I have been supporting a case study to look at the grazing management of the moor, particularly the controlled re-introduction of cattle grazing over the winter.   The case study has shown that a longer trial would be beneficial and the successful application to the Partnership Fund of ENPA will provide 5 years of funding  for the continuation and development of the case study work.

The work will include controlled grazing management of the moor throughout the year, stock disease monitoring, vegetation monitoring by Natural England and an independent ecologist, an economic comparison between farms that use the moor and those that do not, and dissemination of the findings to a range of interest groups on Exmoor.

There may be opportunities to use this work to bolt on additional activity and the Trust will be working with Molland Estate, Exmoor National Park Authority, a local firm of Chartered Surveyors and Natural England to make the most of this opportunity.

Stalking in Scotland - 'Time on the Hill' video

This message arrived in my inbox today from Will Clarkson.  It struck me as a job very well done and well worth 9:22 of your time.

"Just wanted to announce that I have recently finished a short film about stalking in Scotland. If you are interested in the subject, have a look at the link below.  NOTE - stalking has graphic elements and the film reflects that. Just a warning for people who do not wish to see the more gruesome end of things. 

http://vimeo.com/86719402

Will Clarkson
+447919408502
willclarkson.co.uk"

Linking Fire Ecology and Fire Risk - Seminar, Manchester, 12 June 2014

                           

                                               

NERC Knowledge for Wildfire, 3^rd wildfire@manchester KE event

Linking fire ecology and fire risk:

Understanding the first helps plan for the second

Keynote speaker: Professor Brian Oswald (Stephen F Austin State University, Texas, USA)

Discussion: led by the practitioner community

Hanson Room, Humanities Bridgeford Street Building, University of Manchester

12 June 2014, 1.15pm – 4:30pm

This is a free event but places are limited.  

For more details and a booking form, contact debra.whitehead@manchester.ac.uk.  

The deadline for applications is 12 May 2014

www.kfwf.org.uk 

Sky lanterns in the News

Daventry District Council in Northamptonshire is the latest organisation to make a stand against Sky Lanterns.  See the article on the Council's Rural Services Network.

When you stand back from it, the 'ooh-aah' factor cannot be enough to justify the fire raising, or the littering capacity of sky lanterns and the associated risk to the environment, to property and to livestock.  There must be a better way for people to express their views.

Well done to Daventry District Council.  More please!

Deer Management and Sheep Ticks

Knowledge Scotland has published the results of research into the effects on sheep ticks of deer management by culling or fencing.  The research has shown that deer management can reduce tick numbers by >94%.

"The results are very clear that more deer result in more ticks, and that deer management can be used for controlling ticks."  This link takes you to a summary that provides links to the research papers.

See the related article that considers the 'Controlling Ticks by Treating Deer with Acaricides'.  This idea has been around for over 10 years and was based on the success of treated White Tailed Deer in the USA.  As the article indicates, there are practical issues that have so far prevented the treatment of Red deer in the UK.  Some issues are not mentioned in the article: how to prevent individual deer obtaining an overdose of acaricide at treatment stations, how to keep acaricide out of the food chain and the impact of treatment with acaricide on the value of the venison.

Nicholas Hawkings-Byass

I was saddened to learn of the death of Nicholas Hawkings-Byass, the founder of MFH Helicopters and driving force behind the aerial application of asulam for bracken control.  He was well known throughout the UK amongst the bracken control community and he leaves a large gap.

Without his dogged determination it is unlikely that the business of aerial application of pesticides and herbicides would have survived recent challenges, and all those who use a helicopter to apply asulam for bracken control are in his debt.

"Peatlands put in peril as demand for grouse shooting takes off"

Photo: Getty Images

The title is taken straight from the article in The Independent today.  It is an example of the sort of rhetoric that fills column inches and achieves nothing positive for our uplands.  'Debate by press release' is never going to get us very far and is a sad indication of the state of the relations between the RSPB and Natural England.

Note that the quote from the Moorland Association should read 'wildfire' not 'wildlife', which makes a bit more sense.

From my perspective, the best thing we can do is to ignore this type of exchange and get back to the job in hand of building dialogue and consensus wherever we can find it.

As an aside, it is good to see the Director Scotland for the GWCT, and Heather Trust Board member, getting his photo in The Independent.  Nice dogs!

Upland Guidance Events for Natural England

These events have been postponed.

We had been asked by Natural England to set up four events in March & April to 'user test' the draft upland guidance coming out of the Upland Evidence Review.  The events would also have considered the recent Moorland Infrastructure Guidance and also the work that has been developing a Better Outcomes approach within Natural England.

As a result of the uncertainties surrounding the guidance, particularly in relation to burning and restoration (see the earlier post), a decision was taken to postpone the events to allow more time for the guidance to be developed fully, so that the detailed Practitioner Guidance can be included in the scope of the events.

The events had been planned at Whitfield, Northumberland; Spaunton, North York Moors; Moscar, Peak District; and Dartmoor Forest.  I am grateful to those who kindly agreed to host these events and I am sorry that it was not possible to complete the process.

I maintain that the type of 'talk & walk' events organised for a diverse range of delegates are incredibly valuable and that we should do more of them.  This style of event provides an opportunity for people to hear and gain an understanding of the views of other people, and gets all of us out of the silos of our normal thinking.  The added attraction of taking everyone out onto an area of hill, fell or moorland is a further, valuable feature that mixes people up and places the discussion in context; these areas look different when removed from PowerPoint.

With our independent, UK-wide overview, the Trust is uniquely placed to run these events well.  I will continue to advocate that we are missing opportunities by not getting people together in this way more often.

Wildfire in Scotland - being taken seriously

The appointment of a Wildfire Project Manager by the Scottish Fire & Rescue Service (SFRS) is very welcome.  Group Manager Garry Burnett is an old friend as he had been involved with the Scottish Wildfire Forum (SWF) in its early days.

This appointment was reported in today's edition of the P&J and also Highland News.

Garry will be working directly to Assistant Chief Officer Robert Scott who is the Chairman of the SWF.  This appointment is a clear and very welcome statement of intent by the SFRS to treat the threat posed by wildfire seriously.  We have some distance to travel to being muirburn issues together with wildfire but this appointment will help us move faster in the right direction.

In my role as Vice-chairman of the England & Wales Wildfire Forum (EWWF), as well as being on the Executive Committee of the SWF, I will be seeking a more integrated approach to wildfire north and south of the border.  There are many potential benefits of closer working.  Another important group to bring into this arena is the Chief Fire Officer's Association Wildfire Group.  This is made easier as the chairman of this Group is Paul Hedley, the Deputy Chief Fire Officer for Northumberland Fire & Rescue Service, who is also a leading light of the the EWWF.

It is a world that is full of acronyms, and there are many hurdles to be jumped, but the threat from wildfire must be given a higher profile before we are forced to pay more attention by the next spate of wildfires.  It is not 'if', it is 'when'.

Well done to the SFRS for grasping this issue so positively.

A Review of Natural England's Upland Evidence Review

The first phase of Natural England’s Upland Evidence Review was completed at the end of May, last year, with the publication of the five topic reports that covered:

• Tracks on blanket peat
• Restoration of blanket bog
• The effects of managed burning on upland peatland
• Upland hay meadows
• Moorland grazing and stocking rates

Full details and downloads are available from the Natural England website.

On behalf of the Trust, I supported the Upland Evidence Review by contributing to the production of the Tracks report, and I am also a member of the Defra Upland Stakeholders Forum, which has had a role overseeing the Review.  

As a result of this involvement, I have seen the draft internal guidance that Natural England is now producing.  This next phase of the work is the ‘evidence to advice’ phase that is developing the evidence established in the five topic reviews into guidance that Natural England can give to its staff when dealing with land management issues.  Note that this is internal advice for Natural England staff and is not advice for the owners and managers of land.

The internal guidance is being developed at three levels:

• Quick start – things to think about
• Upland Principles – summary guidance
• Upland Practitioner – detailed guidance 

The quick start guidance provides context and I have no issue with this.  The Upland Principles have been drafted in four sections, as the burning and restoration topics have been addressed in one paper.  I am happy with the approach that has been adopted for three of the papers but I have difficulty with the burning and restoration paper.

The burning and restoration paper was published after the other three and was circulated for discussion at the meeting of the Best Practice Burning Group, last month.  The late circulation of this report and its contents was bound to produce some fireworks, and we were not disappointed.  The challenge was that I found myself as Chairman of the meeting and had the task of producing a coherent response to the paper from the meeting.

The week following the Burning Group meeting I was treated to another review of the Upland Principles papers at a meeting with Natural England in Newcastle.  This was part of the stakeholder engagement process and the Moorland Association and the RSPB joined me.  Again the main bone of contention was the burning and restoration paper.

We were also given an insight into the development of the Upland Practitioner detailed guidance and a sensible approach seems to have been adopted to this.

So what are the sticking points with the process, the development of the Upland Principles guidance and the burning and restoration paper in particular?

I am not content that effective stakeholder engagement has taken place.  I have been privileged to be invited to attend several meetings and the Upland Stakeholders Forum has been briefed by Natural England.  However, I am not convinced that the feedback that has been provided from these meetings and briefings has been acted on.  There is a feeling that this process has been window dressing and box ticking, rather than meaningful engagement.  On many occasions, I have been presented with the Natural England solution to the issue in a paper a few days before a meeting and asked to comment on it.  This does not feel like a two-way, engagement process to me and appears to be more focused on obtaining external validation to the views that Natural England want to express anyway.

The burning and restoration paper has several 'red line' issues that relate to a stated objective of stopping burning on blanket bog.  I am fully supportive of the principle that burning should only take place where it is going to achieve benefit and that peatland is a sensitive area where burning may not be appropriate.  However, in my view the statements in this draft guidance go beyond the evidence, and I cannot support this as it is drafted.  I believe it to have approached the issues from the wrong direction: it has started highlighting where conflict exists whereas it would make much more sense to me to establish positions of agreement and work from these. The direction of travel set out in this paper can be supported, but the presentation and the final objective goes too far and appears to be aimed at alienating the managers of peatland.  If this is its aim, it has been effective.

I would like to finish this rather lengthy post on a positive note:

• I fully support the Upland Evidence Review process;
• Natural England have tackled a difficult job effectively;
• The 'evidence to advice' phase is a critical part of the process if it is to have long-term value;
• Much of what has been produced is very valuable; and
• People with knowledge and experience to enhance that available within Natural England stand ready to help develop the guidance.

The message to Natural England is several fold:

• Help is available but it must be harnessed into the process that develops the guidance, not kept at arms length;
• Presenting the solution is not stakeholder engagement;
• Genuine engagement with stakeholders to achieve partnership working is the only way that we can make progress;
• Any drive that exists within Natural England to influence the nature of the advice, regardless of the evidence, must be resisted; and
• All the review documents in the world will achieve nothing unless there is appropriate action on the ground; this requires support and understanding from the managers of the land.

A final thought: it has been muted that there are groups of landowners in Northern England who might on their own initiative be willing to work together to deliver multiple objectives across a large area of land.  What a revelation this could be! Such a group would be able to achieve far more overnight than the current system, with all its expensively produced guidance, could ever achieve.  If Natural England wants to provide long-term, lasting benefits for the uplands of England, ways to support such an approach should be sought.

Natural England might have to sacrifice some control but the benefit to the land, to the communities and the diversity of species could be enormous.

Maybe that is what this is all meant to be about. 

Soil samples: 10 things you may not know about peat

Photo: Paul Turner, RSPB

See the rather zany article on the BBC News website that has been written in support of the Peatland conference taking place in Caithness, this week. someone had clearly been given a task to come up with 10 bits of knowledge about peat and appears to have found the task challenging.  The list starts off well, but dips when it refers to 'Peat is sexy', which may be stretching a point!