The Big Forestry Sell-Off... Good or bad...Thoughts

[john burgess]

I'm new to Arb Talk and am somewhat removed from the UK industry having moved to work and live in France. From initially believing the sell of to be relatively harmless my stance has changed considerably, particularly afetr being enlightened by some European based practitoners, As such the wider implications of this sale are really scary and hope anyone can alleviate my concerns with regards the following:

 

Avoiding the arguments with regards the ‘Public Bodies Bill’, the concerns about access and other mainstream issues, which are the current base of opposition to the plans principally from public or political quarters, there remain four very serious wider reaching issues that will result in collateral damage to the industry as a whole:

Existing guidelines and management techniques will become void. The diminishment of the FC has to occur in some form to allow the proposals to become more accountable financially when its major income source is sold. Not only will any reference to values of trees in ecological, environmental, amenity value, which allow for continued research, be removed by the sole recognition of trees for timber value alone based on the proposed sales but also all of the work by the FC and others will be simply discredited and thus a complete halt in progress towards ‘sustainable forest management’ in the UK will occur.

The ideals of Sustainable Forest Management are borne out of international liaison, the subsequent treaties and obligations were then ratified by the UK. Read any documentation, guidelines and principles with regards global forestry and the fact that sustainable forest management is only achievable with community interaction or ownership, is regularly quoted. State funded forestry provides the example for a sustainable structure to proceed in all forest management, be it plantation or primeval. State funded forestry allows for a secondary income which aids the internal timber market as well as allowing for all relevant sustainable factors to be achieved by self financing. The UK parliament will be allowing England to become the ‘miscreant’ example – the exact opposite model to the ideals established after over 20 years of intensive global academic research, (which the UK contributed to funding).

It is a fact that whoever purchases ex FC woodland, from NGO through to International business, will reduce management and maintenance. Not only will this reduce the biodiversity recognised in well managed woodlands. It will produce a large surplus of qualified personnel into an already disenfranchised private land based management industry. There is simply not enough work for these practitioners and the overspill into horticulture and other sectors will be difficult for all existing practitioners. Many of those that have worked in public estate will have been able to gain the most up to date qualifications and certification against those in the private sector, who have had to pay for updates. This imbalance will have drastic consequences for the incumbent private sector

The reduction of future management and maintenance comes at a time of extreme pressure on the natural ecology of our landscape from various ‘introduced’ threats: Grey Squirrels, Deer, Rhododendron & Other non native plants and last but most significantly the emergence of Phytophthora and other diseases. There is little doubt that the spread of forest pests will become an increasingly significant issue and will assuredly isolate the UK timber industry further and increase demand for imported timbers. Measures to ban timber from non sustainable resources or even illegally felled timber have not been adopted by either the UK or the EU to date. Timber prices will thus be prone to foreign influence beyond the control of the relatively UK timber industry.

Anybody working in land based industry will have to re position themselves and adopt a protectionist measures over their business interests at a time when the private land based industry sector is already suffering from the financial crisis and low esteem from a deflated image of the industry as a whole, (further compounded by public critics of the forest sales targeting private industry as being in the ‘Pro’ camp). This will eventually lead into a reduction of taxes through revenue from the private industry, thus further reducing the economic benefits of the ‘disposal of public forest estate’.

 

European Trees

 

the commission costs us the taxpayer approximately 15,000,000 a year . As for sustainable forests in the last few years they have been planting less acreage than the Felling they are also playing with natural regeneration ie a way of saving money. As for grey squirrels and deer the commission they do not control the numbers properly. As for qualified personnel some of them haven't got a clue.

[tractormatt]

Don't know if anyone saw the metro newspaper (was on the train and had nothing to read) but in the section where people can write in one person said that as they make some money back from timber sales and such like the money the government would get from selling the land off would be spent within 12 years don't know where he got his figures from though

[europeantrees]

Hi John Burgess, and thanks for your reply - I am no position to know the realities of what the FC are actually like on the ground and don't dispute your comments. Even with an ineffectual FC and the fact that the lions share of funding come from their timber sales allows them the position to be able to avoid to commit to European and International obligations without costing the taxpayer more than the 30p a year at present. Some money also comes by way of the EU, who won't be too happy to then pay for any shortfall in funds to Forest Research or the Forest Authority. The Forest Enterprise under these plans will almost certainly disappear and for some potential clients the difference between an ex FC contractor and another will initially make no difference in choice - indeed it may well swing in favour of Ex FC if not simply for sympathy? I dont know. But I am trying to complete the consultation paper taking all sides of the argument into account and at present the finances on all levels and possibilities do not add up, particularly with 50% of UK timber sales going direct to the FC when they have a much smaller percentage of land cover. The status quo is certainly not brilliant but there does'nt appear to be a decent alternative and as such these sales are not good.

[john burgess]

At one of the Woods I work in the commission revamped the car park and the approach road the forestry track from the car park was renewed for three quarters of a mile the only trouble was forestry vehicles were not allowed to use it as it was for walkers and bicycles and horse riders

[TRADITIONAL LOGGERS]

Some of the people in the FC/FE have been helpful but some treat the "Contractors" (I hate this word) with little decent respect. We had a site with a 500 tons standing sale and a legal access and signed a 26 page document on how to do the work but the man who's caravan site land it went through said we would damage the stone track so refused access after we had done all the felling. (Lightweight U600 with Mowi Skog 8 so no damage)The local FE man told us to take the wood out within weeks or he would seize it all back and sell to different people. Nice.

 

I hope the whole FC is sold and the woodlands go to the people that have done all the hard work and can look after them. FC woodlands these times are free play areas for the public. If I owned a large woodland I have no problems with public access provided no mess was left behind like it often is.

[TRADITIONAL LOGGERS]

I have been in contact with some of the National Press including the TV following the much one-sided scare coverage of the FC woodland sale/leases. It looks like those of use who work in the general tree world might be given a chance to give our view to the general public and correct some misdleading facts.

 

I am sure people will have read the posts I have done so if there are people who would like to comment possible live please PM me within the next two days. A mobile number would be useful to call you.

 

Statements from some people that all gates will be locked and all trees cut down is rubbish. Legal public footpaths will remain open.

 

I know from info received that the Woodland Trust would like the public to panic and help purchase local woods that are then not maintained as before. Rural areas need work!!

[RichardT]

"It is a fact that whoever purchases ex FC woodland, from NGO through to International business, will reduce management and maintenance."

 

Is it indeed?

 

I could give you a few examples of management being massively improved after sale to private or community buyers. Anecdotal I know, but anecdotes trump bald assertions with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

[peckerwoo]

,,,Breaking story in that the Govt. has just put "on hold" former plans to sell the 15% quota of public owned forest,,,

MTF, (lookin for a news agency link,,,)

[Notmegov]

BBC News - Government U-turn on forest sell-off

 

Oh well have to invest my money in some thing else now.

[TRADITIONAL LOGGERS]

BBC News - Government U-turn on forest sell-off

 

Oh well have to invest my money in some thing else now.

 

There is still a chance for those who wish to purchase a woodland and look after it's future to write direct to the people involved. I have had a good response.