For many years, people who lived near peatlands would cut sods of peat, allow them to dry and use them for fuel.  This, and other human activities such as Draining for agriculture, Deforestation Burning for ‘sporting’ purposes Testing of ordinance Tin streaming (in the case of Dartmoor) have left areas of peatland in a parlous state.  Often there are deep gullies and ditches, so water runs off and the peat dries out, no new material is formed  It is estimated that some 80% of peatlands in the UK are in a damaged or degraded state. They now represent a carbon source rather than a store. When healthy, peatlands can store twice as much carbon as forests, playing a part in reducing global emissions of carbon dioxide and helping to reduce / control flooding, and supporting biodiversity. Sadly, peat forms very slowly, forming (roughly) at a rate one millimetre per year. Peat is formed by the decomposition of plant material under water logged conditions. So at its deepest point, the peat on Dartmoor in nine metres in depth and therefore represent thousands of years of history and can be an archaeological treasure trove. [caption id="attachment_43175" align="aligncenter" width="675"] Scottish moorland[/caption] The UK’s Climate Change Committee has a target that 50% of upland peatlands and 25% of lowland peatlands should be restored to a natural condition by 2050.  If nothing is done, and the climate becomes warmer and drier, then the peatlands of the south west of England could be a thing of the past. Efforts are being made on areas such as Dartmoor to restore the landscape.  The gullies and ditches are being blocked, so that rainwater is retained and the water table is raised so that the wetness of the area is restored.  BY ‘reprofilling’ the landscape, pools will again form and sphagnum moss and other plants will grow and the process of peat formation will begin again.   In recent years, a project  [The South West Peatland Partnership] funded by Natural England South West Water & The National Trust has restored some 1700 hectares of damaged peat bog in the South West.  Whilst this is a long term project, some promising results have been observed such as an increases in the number and species of dragonflies.  They represent food for the next trophic (feeding) level, so that perhaps in time the number of wading birds and mammals on the moor may increase. Other areas of peatland, such as the blanket bogs of Caithness and Sutherlands and the Peak District need to be monitored as they too are at risk. Details of current work can be found here.

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) are some of England’s most remarkable natural places. With over 4,100 sites across the country, they showcase the very best of our wildlife, habitats, and geology - collectively covering around 1.1 million hectares (about 8% of England). Owning a SSSI woodland is a special opportunity. As a custodian of one of these nationally important areas, you play a meaningful part in protecting and enhancing our natural heritage for generations to come. Many owners find this a rewarding way to connect more deeply with their land and its wildlife.  Beyond their conservation value, SSSIs can also offer quiet places for recreation, provide opportunities for scientific study, and deliver wider benefits such as clean water, flood management, carbon storage, and pollination. Because of their importance, some activities on SSSIs need to be carefully managed. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 sets out a list of operations that require consent from Natural England before going ahead—such as tree work, drainage changes, or certain types of recreational activity. Most owners find the process straightforward, and it helps ensure that any work supports the special features of the site. More guidance is available at Sites of special scientific interest: managing your land - GOV.UK When purchasing land, conveyancing checks will normally confirm whether it lies within a SSSI. You can also explore this yourself via the MAGIC map system, and further information about individual sites is available at designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk. Natural England is there to help. Through good management advice, and tailored guidance, they work alongside landowners to support positive management and help sites deliver for nature recovery. Open communication is encouraged, as is collaboration with neighbouring landowners—particularly for larger-scale matters such as deer or squirrel management. Many traditional woodland practices, including coppicing, natural regeneration, and managing invasive species, fit well with SSSI conservation and are often recommended. Some protected features may be less visible, such as fungi or particular bird communities, but the focus is on looking after the habitats that support them. Although caring for a SSSI may feel like a responsibility at first, it can be hugely rewarding. Owners frequently enjoy the sense of purpose, connection to nature, and contribution to biodiversity. Support, advice, and in many cases grant or stewardship options are available—meaning even small woodland owners can make a real and lasting positive difference. Adrian Jowitt  Principal advisor on woodland policy, Natural England.

The UK generally experiences a temperate oceanic climate, which is characterised by mild temperatures, moderate rainfall, and relatively small temperature changes between the seasons.  It is not surprising that there have been some 500 species successfully introduced to gardens and arboreta since 1500. This compares to the thirty something native tree species.  It is perhaps not surprising that introduced species of conifer are used to make up the bulk of plantations / forests for timber production.  Of these, Sitka Spruce is the most common; the others are Scots pine (a native species) Corsican pine,  Norway spruce European larch Hybrid larch Japanese larch Douglas fir and  Lodgepole pine With the exception of Scot’s pine, all are introduced species.  Sitka Spruce accounts for one fifth of forest cover in the UK and half of the timber produced.  The 'value' of Sitka is that it :- grows in a wide range of sites / soils tolerates wind exposure has a high initial growth rate is not a favourite of deer, especially if alternatives are available. gives high yields of timber However, there are problems with being over reliant on a limited number of species.  Three significant challenges could be   Climate change Extreme weather events Introduced pests and pathogens. Our climate is changing to hotter, drier summers coupled with milder, wetter winters.  Extreme weather events, like the storm of 1987 can reek devastation of large areas of forest.   Pests and diseases can rapidly spread through plantations / forests that are essentially monocultures.  The globalisation of world trade has made it 'easier' for pathogens and pests to move around.  Recent years has seen a significant increase in disease, for example, needle blight and phytophthora; also the pest - the appearance of the eight toothed spruce bark beetle.  There is a finite risk that something could arrive and devastate Sitka Spruce populations, and have dramatic effects on the timber industry.  Worse still would be the arrival of multiple pests or pathogens which could initiate a collapse of a forest ecosystem. If the range of tree species planted was increased then the impact of such introductions would hopefully be reduced.  There is also some evidence that a variety of species helps improve resistance to natural disturbances and offers a degree of resilience (though mixed species stands are not always more  resistant to drought).  Consequently, work is underway to determine which, if any, other conifer species might be planted to  Reduce the reliance on traditional timber-producing species Increase resilience and diversify commercial forests. Between 2015 & 2018, Forestry Research Et al. set up across the country a number of clear fell sites, these ranged from Breckland in the east to northern Scotland.  The sites offered a range of soil types and different weather conditions.  The experimental plots measured some 32 x 32 meters, and the trees were spaced 1.9m apart.  The 25 trees ar the centre of each plot were measured throughout the experiment.  Each site studied the establishment and growth of some 19 species.  Scots Pine was planted at each site as a 'control' as it was anticipated that it would establish and grow at all trial sites.  Douglas Fir was also included in these trials as it was thought to be 'under used' in national planting schemes [it only represents 4% of the UK total coniferous growing area], and might be used in a wider range of sites than at present.   The trees at each site had their height and root collar diameter measured, survival was also recorded. Trees included in these trials trials included  Norway spruce Noble fir Grand fir Pacific silver fir Maritime pine Western red cedar Leyland cypress, amongst others. The trials have yielded some interesting observations.  There were significant differences in the performance of the various species at the different locations.  For example, growth and establishment of most trees tested was poorest at Thetford on the Breckland. Interestingly, the inclusion of Douglas Fir proved worthwhile as it performed well, establishing and growing well even on poor / infertile soils, such as that at Thetford.  Data from Europe suggests that it can even maintain growth when experiencing draught, so it would appear to be more versatile than previously thought.  It could also prove to be a viable alternative to Sitka spruce, especially in the south or eastern parts of the UK where it may become hotter and drier in the future.   Another species that did quite well was Maritime Pine, which is thought to be relatively resistant to needle blight (as compared to Corsican pine) and it dealt well with the dryness at Thetford.  Unfortunately, it was not included in the trial Scottish sites.  It would seem to have potential as a fast growing and robust species on sheltered, free draining sites. Other species did not fare well, for example, Macedonian Pine did not establish well on any of the Scottish sites.  European silver fir performed poorly at all sites, and largely failed at Thetford.  It, together with pacific silver fir, grand fir, western red cedar, and coast redwood may not be suited for establishment on clear fell sites, though they might be ok in more shaded conditions beneath other trees.  The Oriental and Serbian Spruce did not establish on any of the sites. Further details of these trials can be found here: https://academic.oup.com/forestry/advance-article/doi/10.1093/forestry/cpaf048/8229725?login=false  or as a PDF here: https://academic.oup.com/forestry/advance-article/doi/10.1093/forestry/cpaf048/8229725 ,

 The red squirrel is a native species, it has been present in the British Isles since the retreat of the glaciers of the last ice age -so around for some 10,000 years.  The grey squirrel on the other hand has only been here since the mid nineteenth century, when it was introduced from America.  Though relatively small numbers were introduced at stately homes, it did incredibly well and they spread out from their original sites, colonising woodlands and spreading across the country.  As the grey squirrel spread so the red squirrel retreated and its numbers declined. Recent population estimates suggest that the grey squirrel population may now be as high as three million, whereas the red squirrel numbers are probably less than 300,000. The grey squirrel is to be regarded as a pest.  Why ? (a).   They strip bark from trees.   This is the main type of damage type of damage. The squirrels remove  bark to access the sap tissues underneath. [caption id="attachment_42793" align="aligncenter" width="675"] Squirrel damage[/caption] (b).   They cause the death of trees.  The damage to the bark and the underlying tissue can affect the flow of water and nutrients from soil to leaves.  It can also allow for the entry of pathogens (parasitic bacteria and fungi). (c).   Their activities have an impact on the quality of timber that can be harvested. (d).   They are associated with biodiversity loss, not only do they complete with and displace the native red squirrel, their presence can affect other woodland species such as songbirds (eat their eggs) and dormice. (e).   Grey squirrels pass on the squirrel pox virus to red squirrels.  Once infected the red squirrels tend to die of dehydration and starvation. [(f).   The grey squirrels that visit my garden dig up bulbs, like crocus, tulips and hyacinths.  They also make raids on soft fruits.] [caption id="attachment_42794" align="aligncenter" width="675"] Older damage by squirrels[/caption] There are measures to stop or limit grey squirrels from breeding.   One ‘extreme’ measure is shooting or trapping followed by euthanasia.  Another measure is the introduction of Pine Martens, they seem to control the numbers of grey squirrels whereas red squirrels have co-existed with Pine Martens in areas like north Scotland for many years.   However, the Governments Animal and Plant agency is developing a contraceptive.  This is a vaccine based product which causes the squirrel’s immune system to render both males and females infertile.   The vaccine induces the formation of antibodies against the animals own reproductive hormones. The idea is to fed it to the grey squirrels through feeding hoppers that grey squirrels can access but not red squirrels or other animals. The bait will need to be palatable and attractive to the squirrels. Should this prove successful, it will be a non-lethal way of reducing the numbers of the grey squirrel without shooting or trapping.   For detailed information on the squirrel contraceptive project, visit https://aphascience.blog.gov.uk/2024/09/30/reducing-grey-squirrel-overpopulation/ Similarly, lots of information on squirrel damage here : https://www.observatree.org.uk/media/1425/identifying-squirrel-damage.pdf  

Woodlands provide us with number of benefits They supply softwoods and hardwoods, which have variety of uses. They provide a variety of habits for many species of wildlife, adding biodiversity to an area. They allow for a number of recreational pastimes. However, we and our woodlands need to prepare and adapt to a changing climate, one in which winters may be milder and summers hotter and drier.  Extreme weather events are also becoming more common.  So woodlands need to be resilient.  If they are resilient, then: They recover better from disturbances, like fire or disease Generally fare better when challenged by storms or floods. A number of government agencies have produced booklets / downloadable files (PDFs) on how to address the possible problems associated with the changing climate.  The advice seems to fall into three basic categories. Increase the range of trees in your woodland, promote diversity.  Look for trees that not only match your site (soil, aspect etc) but also might cope with future climate conditions.  If the climate is drier, then trees which have done well in the past might struggle in the new conditions.  For example, beech was noticeably affected by the drought in the summer of 1976.  Look for trees that can cope or unaffected by disease and insect pests and are from a reputable source and free of disease. Review the management of your woodland. For example, what and when to thin, create access and paths, openings or glades which can improve the diversity of the plants at ground level.  Paths and openings will also improve access within your woodland. [caption id="attachment_41085" align="aligncenter" width="674"] Woodland path covered with mast[/caption] When planting new trees, think about where the trees come from. What conditions do they are experience in their home environment, can they cope with drought. It may be that trees species that usually grow in more southerly areas of Europe will be better suited to the changing conditions. As mentioned above there are a number of publications / guides to help with increasing the resilience and diversity of your woodland.  Some of these are listed in the links below : The Climate Change Hub has a number of informative fact sheets and videos. Information about increasing species diversity from Natural Resources Wales. Improving structural diversity in woodlands from Natural resources Wales:  Forest Research has produced a detailed practice guide on woodland management and climate change. The Government website has numerous links and publications, eg. Advice of new trees and woodlands in light of climate change.

Forests across Europe occupy some 40% of the land area, and until recently they were regarded as not only a source of timber but also an important ’sink’ of carbon.  That is to say, they took in more carbon dioxide in photosynthesis (and stored it away in complex organic compounds) than they released in respiration. However, in recent times, these important biomes have turned from carbon sink to carbon source.  This year, the Finnish forests changed from sink to source.  Forests in the Czech Republic and Germany also released more carbon than they absorbed.  Though French forests are still a sink, their absorption of carbon dioxide has roughly halved in recent years (from 74 million tonnes of CO2 to 37.8 million tonnes in 2022).   Norway has seen a similar reduction in carbon dioxide storage from 32 million tonnes to 18 million tonnes. Seemingly, forests across the continent are losing the ability to act as carbon sinks, but why?  One reason seems to be the increased harvesting of timber,  many forests are privately owned and run on a commercial basis.  The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been a factor as sanctions against Russian timber has lead to more ‘domestic’ culling, for example in Finland.  However, climate change is an important factor in this downturn.  In recent times, droughts (in 2018 and 2022) have had a significant effect of forests, trees are stressed and the effects of drought have been greater than anticipated.  Drought can also be coupled with other extreme weather events (such as storm damage) and outbreaks of bark beetle (which have particularly affected spruce woodlands).  The Czech Republic has reported several outbreaks of bark beetle in recent times. What can be done to mitigate this loss of carbon sinks? Clearly reducing the harvesting of trees for timber and the banning of clear felling would help.  After a clear cut in a boreal or temperate region, it can take a forest 10 to 15 years to become a sink again, and even longer for the original emissions associated with the clear cut to be compensated for. Increasing the diversity and resilience of trees used in forestry is another approach to increasing CO2 absorption, however, it would take some time to determine which trees would be most effective in creating a carbon sink in the face of climate change.  Sadly, it is also the case that many tropical forests are in decline in terms of carbon storage due to deforestation,  expansion of agriculture and fires. Further reading : https://forest.eea.europa.eu/topics/forest-and-climate/carbon-sinks-and-sources  

Trees are remarkably resilient.  In various forms they have been arounds for millions of years.  They have survived asteroid impact (66 million years ago), and a series of successive ice ages.  However, in more recent times they have faced a new challenge, the relentless march of humankind. Early societies felled trees for timber for dwellings, boats*, wood for fire, making tools, as part of ‘flash and burn’ agriculture to create a ‘swidden’ to grow food.  The material felled to create a swidden was allowed to dry and then burnt, the ash released mineral nutrients into the soil for the crops.  As more complex civilisations / societies evolved, there were attempts to restore degraded forests / bare land, and  to protect forests.  The Zhou (Chou) dynasty established a ‘forestry service’ over two thousand years ago, and in India the emperor Ashoka (268 -232 BCE) ordered wide scale reforestation.  Much later in the Middles Ages there were efforts to restore degraded areas, for example, around Nuremberg in the C12th.  Most of these early efforts were concerned with increasing timber production or the mitigation of natural disasters.  In the last two centuries, significant areas of natural forest and woodland have been lost, increasing the risk of soil erosion, flooding and disease (as animals are displaced). In the last century, the percentage cover by forest / woodland in some countries (for example, the UK) was low so vast areas were planted with a single species. Fast growing species (conifers such as pines, spruce and larch) were often grown on what was regarded as marginal land, creating plantations.   In some parts of the Mediterranean, Eucalyptus was planted.  These were species that could cope with the challenging nature of the soil and / or the  topography.   Many of the European initiatives met with some success in terms of timber production and / or the stabilisation of degraded areas (for example, reducing erosion).  Such schemes also created jobs, contributing to the local economy.  But when grassland or heathland were used to create single species plantations, this was often accompanied by a loss in biodiversity. In places, the introduction of non-native species has been challenging as they have become invasive, for example, black cherry. The success of any scheme is dependent on Sound planting techniques and aftercare Selection of the right species for the area The co-operation / involvement of local peoples. Mass planting of a single species can also contribute to the rapid spread of disease / pests (e.g.bark beetles, pine procesionary moth).  Vast swathes of coniferous forest were affected by acid rain (associated with sulphur dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels) in the last century.  This was termed Waldsterben [Wald=forest + sterben=to die].   Problems such as these, coupled with increasing environmental awareness contributed to a rethink of the aims and objectives of forest management / renewal / restoration. However, there were examples where ecological recovery was good, for example, some spruce and black pine ‘monocultures’ were diversified through the planting of a understorey of broadleaved trees, as in Slovenia. In recent times, timber production, control of erosion and reduction of disaster risk remain relevant still, but the importance of biodiversity, resilience and ecosystem services are now uppermost.  There is a move from ‘quantity to quality’ of forest and woodland.  In many countries, a growing interest in recreation and tourism (recognising the importance of green space for mental and physical well being), coupled with growing environmental concerns and recognition of climate change has emerged.   Forest and woodlands across the world, from the boreal regions to the Equator are under threat.  Many have been lost or badly degraded, and are in desperate need of restoration.  Forests are no longer regarded as sources of timber, but are important providers of ecosystem services, such as the mitigation of flooding. So, in more recent times they have been efforts to restore and repair forests and woodlands.  Homogenous and dense plantations / forests in boreal regions had clearings created to allow light demanding species to establish.  Limitations have been placed on clear cutting, and the use of fencing, tree protectors have [caption id="attachment_41889" align="alignleft" width="300"] squirrel[/caption] helped to reduce browsing pressure (by deer / squirrels etc).  One means of promoting biodiversity is ensuring that the woodland / forests offer deadwood.  This provides a ‘home’ to species as varied as woodpeckers to saproxylic beetles. These beetles help break down wood so that it can be further broken down by fungi and bacteria, returning nutrients to the soil. Tree girdling was a technique used in Finland to create deadwood, it severs the conducting tissue (phloem) so that the supply of sugars is interrupted.  Thought is now given to the selection and introduction of tree species that are adapted and resilient to anticipated climate change impacts.   Though countries have adopted a variety of techniques in recent times, the extent of forest and woodland restoration has been largely limited by the funding available.  Restoration does not come cheap, funding over significant period of time is needed, and time itself for the effects of  the measures to become apparent. For detailed information on forest restoration see - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40725-024-00235-3 Intereesting facts : Henry V111’s flag ship, the Mary Rose , was built using oak and elm. It was the first big ship of the Tudor naval fleet and it is estimated that over 600 trees were needed for its construction,. That is equivalent to about 16 hectares of forest / woodland.  And Cver 370 species are supported in the territories of the Karen swidden farmers in northern Thailand.  

In her first budget as Chancellor, Rachel Reeves introduced a series of tax adjustments intended to raise additional revenue. While the headline measure was an increase in employers’ National Insurance contributions, two other changes have a more direct impact on woodland and forestry owners: a rise in Capital Gains Tax (CGT) and a reduction in Agricultural Property Relief (APR). Capital Gains Tax: Higher Rates, Immediate Impact The increase in CGT, from 20% to 24%, is likely to influence woodland sales and ownership decisions. Unlike agricultural land, CGT on woodlands applies only to the increase in land value, not the timber growing on it. This distinction benefits woodland owners by allowing them to potentially reduce their CGT liability, provided they obtain valuations for the timber at the time of purchase and sale. However, the higher rate may discourage woodland sales, as owners now face a larger tax bill. With the effect of the rate increase being immediate, many owners may choose to hold onto their woodlands for longer, which could have an indirect impact on the supply and demand of land suitable for forestry. Agricultural Property Relief: Tightening Inheritance Tax Relief Agricultural Property Relief, or APR, is a longstanding relief mechanism that exempts certain landowners from Inheritance Tax (IHT) if the land is classified as agricultural. While it might not seem relevant to forestry, commercially managed woodlands qualify under APR, allowing woodland owners to reduce their IHT burden, often to zero. However, Reeves’ budget has placed new limits on this relief. Under the new rules, commercially managed woodlands valued up to £1 million will still benefit from IHT relief. However, for estates exceeding this value, the IHT exemption is now capped, with any value over £1 million taxed at a reduced rate of 20% rather than the usual 40%. While the cap still offers a significant tax advantage, the change is a blow to larger woodland estates, many of which previously enjoyed full exemption. How Big Landowners are Affected This shift in APR has sparked a backlash among prominent landowners. Jeremy Clarkson, known for his 1,000-acre farm, and James Dyson, who owns roughly 36,000 acres, are among those likely to be impacted. For estates of this scale, even at the reduced IHT rate, tax liabilities could amount to millions: roughly £2 million for Clarkson and up to £72 million for Dyson. However, the budget changes leave room for maneuver. Landowners can avoid these new IHT liabilities by transferring land to their heirs well in advance of their passing, with a minimum of seven years required to ensure these assets fall outside of IHT calculations. Smaller Woodland Owners: Minimal Impact For smaller woodland owners, the impact of this budget is limited. Estates under £1 million in value will retain full APR benefits, and as long as their woodlands are commercially managed—whether by having a management plan or demonstrating some level of timber income—the IHT relief will remain. Timber income remains tax-free, and woodlands are still exempt from business rates, leaving smaller owners largely untouched by the budget changes. Final Thoughts While the budget introduces challenges for some, particularly larger landowners, smaller woodland owners who manage their land commercially are less affected. The Chancellor's adjustments aim to close gaps that previously benefited wealthy estates while preserving essential reliefs for those managing woodlands as smaller, income-generating enterprises. As the dust settles, these changes may encourage long-term holding strategies among larger estates, potentially reshaping the landscape of woodland ownership and management in the UK.